Validated swallowing and nutrition guidelines for patients with head and neck cancer: Identification of high‐risk patients for proactive gastrostomy

Abstract

The risk categories in the guidelines are valid to assist early identification of swallowing and nutritional risk and guide decision-making on proactive gastrostomy tube insertion.

Optimising nutrition support in patients with head and neck cancer

“…weeks, or no feeding tube, AND lost ≥10% body weight These outcome definitions are described fully elsewhere when they were used to originally validate the S&N Guidelines (Brown et al, 2013b), and are deemed to confirm the prediction that the patient required a proactive gastrostomy as per the S&N Guidelines.…”

“…Two recommend high risk patients receive a proPEG (Brown et al, 2013b;Wood, 2005). The third classifies patients as high or low nutritional risk, but favours a reactive approach to tube placement (Kiss et al, 2012).…”

“…This protocol was previously validated in a patient cohort receiving 3D conformal radiotherapy (Brown et al, 2013b).…”

“…Cohorts: 2007-2008 and 2010-2011 Retrospective comparative cohort study: 3D conformal radiotherapy versus helical-IMRT proactive approach to the insertion of enteral feeding tubes (Brown et al, 2013b).…”

“…There were no significant differences between the two types of treatment with regards to the outcome of weight change from diagnosis to the end of radiotherapy treatment (Table 4- Brown et al, 2013b Nutrition outcomes -"need a proactive gastrostomy"…”