Patients with head and neck cancer may need more intensive pain management to maintain daily functioning: a multi-center study
- 167 Downloads
The purpose of this study is to investigate the prevalence of pain, pain management, and impact of recent pain on daily functioning in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) and patients with other cancers.
This multi-center survey was conducted by using Brief Pain Inventory questionnaire to evaluate pain status and its impact on daily functioning.
A total of 3289 patients were analyzed including 708 HNC patients and 2581 patients with other cancers. The overall pain prevalence was 69.17%. A higher percentage of HNC patients had recent pain (60.59 vs. 44.01%, P < 0.001), required pain management (86.29 vs. 72.03%, P < 0.001), and used any analgesics (53.81 vs. 34.52%, P < 0.001). HNC patients with pain management had a higher prevalence of recent pain (85.83 vs. 81.14%, P = 0.044) and a slightly lower satisfaction rate (74.00 vs. 79.70%, P = 0.070). Regarding the impact of pain on daily functioning, HNC patients had a lower mean interference score for general activity such as walking, normal work, sleep, and life enjoyment.
The HNC patients may need more intensive pain management to achieve optimal pain control and maintain daily functioning.
KeywordsHead and neck cancer Prevalence of pain Pain management Daily functioning Multi-center study
This work was supported by the Taiwan Cancer Palliative Care Society and by Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Taiwan. Editorial support in the form of copyediting and manuscript formatting was provided by Cactus Communications and funded by Janssen Taiwan. This study was also supported by a grant from Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital (KMUH103-3M11).
S.F.C. and T.C.L. designed the study.
K.M.R., Y.Y.S., C.J.Y., M.F.W., J.S.C., C.S.C., Y.M.L., T.J.C., R.K.H., M.Y.L., Y.C.S., K.D.L., P.Y.L., M.S.Y., W.L.H., and T.C.L. collected clinical data.
S.F.C. and T.C.L. conducted the database interpretation and statistical analysis.
S.F.C. wrote the manuscript.
T.C.L. approved of the last version of the manuscript.
All the authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest statement
We have read and understood the policy of Supportive Care in Cancer on disclosing conflicts of interest. The authors of this manuscript do not have any financial relationship with the organization that sponsored the research. The authors have full control of all primary data and agree to allow the journal to review study-related data if requested.
- 2.Bozimowski G (2012) Patient perceptions of pain management therapy: a comparison of real-time assessment of patient education and satisfaction and registered nurse perceptions pain. Manag Nurs 13:186–193Google Scholar
- 12.De Sanctis V, Bossi P, Sanguineti G, Trippa F, Ferrari D, Bacigalupo A, Ripamonti CI, Buglione M, Pergolizzi S, Langendjik JA, Murphy B, Raber-Durlacher J, Russi EG, Lalla RV (2016) Mucositis in head and neck cancer patients treated with radiotherapy and systemic therapies: literature review and consensus statements. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 100:147–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Saxena A, Gnanasekaran N, Andley M (1995) An epidemiological study of prevalence of pain in head & neck cancers. Indian J Med Res 102:28–33Google Scholar
- 34.Sroussi HY, Epstein JB, Bensadoun RJ, Saunders DP, Lalla RV, Migliorati CA, Heaivilin N, Zumsteg ZS (2017) Common oral complications of head and neck cancer radiation therapy: mucositis, infections, saliva change, fibrosis, sensory dysfunctions, dental caries, periodontal disease, and osteoradionecrosis. Cancer Med 6:2918–2931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.Sutherland JE, Wesley RM, Cole PM, Nesvacil LJ, Daly ML, Gepner GJ (1988) Differences and similarities between patient and physician perceptions of patient pain. Fam Med 20:343–346Google Scholar
- 37.Wagner CL, Baggerly C, McDonnell S, Baggerly KA, French CB, Baggerly L, Hamilton SA, Hollis BW (2016) Post-hoc analysis of vitamin D status and reduced risk of preterm birth in two vitamin D pregnancy cohorts compared with South Carolina March of Dimes 2009–2011 rates. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 155:245–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar