Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2018 Apr 18;18(1):444.
doi: 10.1186/s12885-018-4355-0.

Improving quality of life through the routine use of the patient concerns inventory for head and neck cancer patients: a cluster preference randomized controlled trial

Simon N Rogers  1   2   3 , Derek Lowe  4   5 , Cher Lowies  6 , Seow Tien Yeo  7 , Christine Allmark  8 , Dominic Mcavery  4 , Gerald M Humphris  9 , Robert Flavel  10 , Cherith Semple  11 , Steven J Thomas  12 , Anastasios Kanatas  8
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Improving quality of life through the routine use of the patient concerns inventory for head and neck cancer patients: a cluster preference randomized controlled trial

Simon N Rogers et al. BMC Cancer. .

Abstract

Background: The consequences of treatment for Head and Neck cancer (HNC) patients has profound detrimental impacts such as impaired QOL, emotional distress, delayed recovery and frequent use of healthcare. The aim of this trial is to determine if the routine use of the Patients Concerns Inventory (PCI) package in review clinics during the first year following treatment can improve overall quality of life, reduce the social-emotional impact of cancer and reduce levels of distress. Furthermore, we aim to describe the economic costs and benefits of using the PCI.

Methods: This will be a cluster preference randomised control trial with consultants either 'using' or 'not using' the PCI package at clinic. It will involve two centres Leeds and Liverpool. 416 eligible patients from at least 10 consultant clusters are required to show a clinically meaningful difference in the primary outcome. The primary outcome is the percentage of participants with less than good overall quality of life at the final one-year clinic as measured by the University of Washington QOL questionnaire version 4 (UWQOLv4). Secondary outcomes at one-year are the mean social-emotional subscale (UWQOLv4) score, Distress Thermometer (DT) score ≥ 4, and key health economic measures (QALY-EQ-5D-5 L; CSRI).

Discussion: This trial will provide knowledge on the effectiveness of a consultation intervention package based around the PCI used at routine follow-up clinics following treatment of head and neck cancer with curative intent. If this intervention is (cost) effective for patients, the next step will be to promote wider use of this approach as standard care in clinical practice.

Trial registration: 32,382. Clinical Trials Identifier, NCT03086629 .

Protocol: Version 3.0, 1st July 2017.

Keywords: Head and neck Cancer; Intervention; Patient concerns inventory; Patient reported outcomes; Quality of life.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The PCI trial has ethical approval from North West - Liverpool Central Research Ethics Committee REC reference: IRAS 16/NW/0465, Project ID: 189554. It also has approval from the Health Research Authority (HRA). The Research and Development Department at Aintree University Hospital NHS Trust (AUH) is coordinating the trial and AUH is the sponsor for the trial.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Patient Flow Diagram
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Example of PCI printouts
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Rogers SN, Clifford N, Lowe D. Patient and carer unmet needs: a survey of the British Association of Head and Neck Oncology Nurses. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;49(5):343–348. doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2010.06.017. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Yeh JC, Cheng MJ, Chung CH, Smith TJ. Using a question prompt list as a communication aid in advanced cancer care. J Oncol Pract. 2014;10(3):e137–e141. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2013.001295. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brown RF, Bylund CL, Li Y, Edgerson S, Butow P. Testing the utility of a cancer clinical trial specific question prompt list (QPL-CT) during oncology consultations. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;88(2):311–317. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.02.009. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dimoska A, Butow PN, Lynch J, Hovey E, Agar M, Beale P, Tattersall MH. Implementing patient question-prompt lists into routine cancer care. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;86(2):252–258. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.04.020. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brown RF, Butow PN, Dunn SM, Tattersall MH. Promoting patient participation and shortening cancer consultations: a randomised trial. Br J Cancer. 2001;85(9):1273–1279. doi: 10.1054/bjoc.2001.2073. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data