Are soft tissue therapies beneficial for patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer?

Abstract

There is a widely acknowledged and steadily rising incidence rate of head and neck tumours. Consequently, the overall quality of life of patients suffering from such tumour locations has significantly deteriorated, while attendant treatment costs remain on the rise. Advances in modern surgical techniques are believed to appreciably improve the prognosis, though. At the same time, a pursuit of invasive anti-cancer treatment results in many structural and functional changes in those patients, warranting application of select physiotherapy management. This manuscript presents a patient diagnosed with neck tumours in whom physiotherapy regimen comprising the select soft tissue therapy techniques was applied. The implemented physiotherapeutic intervention proved instrumental in achieving an appreciable improvement with regard to a majority of variables under study.

Role of Manual Therapy for Neck Pain and Quality of Life in Head and Neck Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review

“…Highest scores of critical appraisal rated were 91.6% and 84.61% allotted to studies by Parab et al [26] and Felser et al [27] Lowest scores amongst all seven studies were allotted to study by Kawczyński et al 50%. [31] Most studies described relevant adequate background literature, sample size for the study purpose and provided outcome data with its relevance. [26][27][28][29][30][31] Statistical analysis used for reporting results from clinical trials.…”

“…[31] Most studies described relevant adequate background literature, sample size for the study purpose and provided outcome data with its relevance. [26][27][28][29][30][31] Statistical analysis used for reporting results from clinical trials. [25][26][27] Most of the studies had inadequate description of intervention and presence of co interventions raised methodological concerns.…”

“…[25][26][27] Most of the studies had inadequate description of intervention and presence of co interventions raised methodological concerns. [27][28][29][30][31] Sample size justification was not reported by Pattanshetty. [25] Randomisation of participants into groups was also reported satisfactorily.…”

“…The selected 217 studies were screened and 2164 studies excluded (abstract and title), and 11 full text studies were screened according to eligibility criteria and 04 studies excluded and 07 studies found to be eligible for the current study and was included in the review . [25][26][27][28][29][30][31] PRISMA flow chart outlined in [Figure 1].…”

“…Included quantitative studies were conducted in different countries; 3 studies (2 case report and 1 case series) in USA, 2 studies (2 clinical trials) in India, (pre post experimental study) in Germany and 1 (case report) in Poland. [25][26][27][28][29][30][31] All were published between 2010 and 2020. All studies were conducted for duration 6 days to 12 weeks having HNC patients as their study population.…”