Submit Your Article CMED MEACR meeting
Home Print this page Email this page Users Online: 83
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 123-127

Quality of life assessment of oral cancer patients after mandibular resections using the University of Washington Quality of Life (Version 4) questionnaire: Reconstruction with pectoralis major myocutaneous flap


1 Department of Pharmacology, Institute of Pharmacy, Nirma University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
2 Department of Oncology, Shrey Hospitals, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India

Date of Web Publication14-Aug-2017

Correspondence Address:
Drasty Vora
Department of Pharmacology, Institute of Pharmacy, Nirma University, Sarkhej-Gandhinagar Highway, Chandlodia, Gota, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 382 481
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2278-0513.213013

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Objectives: Mandibular resection for oral cancer is a mainstay and prime requirement to achieve an acceptable boundary of tumor removal. Mandibular resection has been related with a poor health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The objective of this study was to evaluate the HRQOL in patients who have undergone mandibular resections of oral cancer and reconstructed with pectoralis major myocutaneous flap (PMMF). Patients and Methods: There were 192 consecutive patients between 2011 and 2014 who were treated for head and neck cancer; among them, 65 patients having oral cancer were treated with mandibular resections. HRQOL was assessed by the University of Washington QOL (UWQOL) questionnaire version 4 after 3–12 months postoperatively. Study Designs and Results: In the UWQOL, the best-scoring domains were shoulder, recreation, and pain, whereas the lowest scores were for speech, chewing, and swallowing. Conclusions: Mandible reconstruction with PMMF would have significant influence on patients' QOL and oral functions. The societal and literary data show a low level of education and low economic status for the majority of patients.

Keywords: Domain, health-related quality of life, pectoralis major myocutaneous flap, swallowing, University of Washington Quality of Life version 4


How to cite this article:
Vora D, Shah J, Maharaja B. Quality of life assessment of oral cancer patients after mandibular resections using the University of Washington Quality of Life (Version 4) questionnaire: Reconstruction with pectoralis major myocutaneous flap. Clin Cancer Investig J 2017;6:123-7

How to cite this URL:
Vora D, Shah J, Maharaja B. Quality of life assessment of oral cancer patients after mandibular resections using the University of Washington Quality of Life (Version 4) questionnaire: Reconstruction with pectoralis major myocutaneous flap. Clin Cancer Investig J [serial online] 2017 [cited 2017 Nov 24];6:123-7. Available from: http://www.ccij-online.org/text.asp?2017/6/2/123/213013


  Introduction Top


Myocutaneous flap has gained a widespread use since its first description by Quillen in 1978 for head and neck reconstruction. In addition, description of using flaps for reconstruction is mentioned in the ancient Indian literature Sushrut Samhita. The advantages of myocutaneous flap compared to other flaps include that this flap provides a large cutaneous island that can be used for defects involving two epithelial surfaces, and it offers one-stage reconstruction without the need to change patient's position intraoperatively. In addition, in 1979, Dr. Ariyan first described the use of pectoralis major myocutaneous flap (PMMF) for head and neck reconstruction, and after that, PMMF has been recognized as a landmark for head and neck cancer reconstruction.[1] It is agreed that patients with mandibular invasion by oral squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) should be treated surgically. A mandibular resection is prerequisite in patients with remarkable mandibular invasion. However, mandibular resection has long been associated with a poor quality of life (QOL).[2] Health-related QOL (HRQOL) has become an increasingly important outcome measure for patients undergoing treatment for various cancers and other ailments. Little information exists in the literature regarding the patients' HRQOL after mandibular resections. Hence, the main aim of our study was to assess the HRQOL of patients by using the University of Washington QOL (UWQOL) questionnaire who have undergone mandibular resections of oral cancer and reconstructions with PMMF.[3],[4],[5],[6]


  Patients and Methods Top


This was a prospective single-centric study and it was approved by the Institutional Ethical Committee of Nirma University. The study comprised 192 patients treated with head and neck cancer between 2011 and 2014; among them, 65 cases were of oral cancer which were taken into consideration. These patients were treated by primary surgery for oral SCC with mandibular resections. Informed consent was given and signed by the patients or their relatives, and information brochure was given to them in which details of the entire study and its purpose were mentioned in vernacular language (Gujarati). Patients having critical comorbid diseased condition, age below 18 years, patients having any other cancer except that of oral cancer, and patients with recurrence tumors and extensively progressed tumors were excluded. Inclusion criteria of the study were adults from age 19 to 70 years, patients diagnosed and survived from oral cancer reconstructed with PMMF, and have disease free survival at least 3–12 months after reconstruction were included in the study.

Questionnaires and data collection

The UWQOL questionnaire version 4 was used in this study. The UWQOL forms were given to the patients to fill during the time they came for follow-up and it provides a broad measure of QOL for patients with head and neck cancer with good acceptability, practicality, validity, reliability, and responsiveness. The questionnaire is composed of 15 domains: twelve are disease-specific items (pain, appearance, activity, recreation, swallowing, chewing, speech, shoulder, taste, saliva, mood, and anxiety) and three are global questions. The domains are scored on a scale varying from 0 (worst)[7],[8],[9],[10],[11],[12] to 100 (best). Apart from the 15 questions, the patients were asked to select no more than 3 of the 12 disease-specific domains that had been the most important to them in the preceding 7 days. The scoring was calculated according to the standard scores for individual domains mentioned in UWQOL guidelines. The validated UWQOL questionnaire available in vernacular language (Gujarati) was used. Patients' pro forma was prepared by asking them or from hospital databases about their employment status, educational status, addiction, stage of tumor, and marital status.[13],[14],[15],[16],[17]

Statistical analysis

The data were recorded and then assessed with the help of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software (SPSS version 16.0, SPSS Inc., IBM). Univariate analysis of variance was carried out, and P < 0.005 was accepted as statistically significant.


  Results Top


Sixty-five patients with oral cancer were considered in this study; all patients completed the questionnaire during their visit to the hospital for follow-up. Of the 65 patients who completed questionnaires, there were 55 men and 10 women with a median age of 50.5 years (range: 30–60); the buccal mucosa (n = 42, 64.61%) and tongue (n = 12, 18.46%) were the most common sites [Table 1] followed by alveolus (n = 7, 10.76%) and retromolar trigon (n = 4, 6.15%). Forty-nine of the 65 patients (75.38%) were classified as T1–T2, while 16 patients (24.61%) were classified as T3–T4. The postoperative follow-up period ranged from 3 months to 2 years, and the mean follow-up period was 2.5 years. Forty-six patients were between 1 and 3 years after treatment and the remaining 19 patients had been treated before 3 months. It was observed that buccal mucosa cancer is more prevalent among other cancers in Indian ethnicity.
Table 1: Patient's pro forma

Click here to view


The University of Washington Quality of Life questionnaire

The scores for 12 disease-specific domains and the importance of each domain are shown in [Table 2]. The best-scoring domain was shoulder and recreation, with the main scores of 79.53 and 73.84, respectively. The worst score domains are chewing, swallowing, and speech, with the main scores of 46.15, 48.69, and 53.23, respectively.
Table 2: Mean of scores of domains of the University of Washington Quality of Life (version 4) questionnaire

Click here to view


Among selection of the three domains over the past 7 days, chewing was considered the most important aspect followed by speech and swallowing. Domains such as recreation, shoulder, and mood were considered least important to the patients.

About 60% of the patients had a low education level. Twenty-two (33.84%) patients did not complete education above 12th standard. Forty-three patients (66.15%) were having education below 12th standard. Consumption of pan, gutkha, beedi, tobacco, and smoking were highly seen among male patients. QOL was negatively affected in higher tumor stages. Some patients were unable to read and write and they need help to complete the questionnaire [Table 3].
Table 3: Mean of scores of general questions

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


HRQOL is an integrated process for the overall treatment of oral cancer patients. The impact of cancer and its later consequences affects the quality of patient's life and their families as well. Mandibular resections have their own drawbacks such as unevenness, facial asymmetry, and loss of teeth due to which chewing is compromised. Mandible is involved in crucial activities such as protection of airway passage, support to the tongue and lower dentition. Furthermore, it is involved in functions such as speech, mastication, and deglutition. Reconstruction of mandibular defects after tumor resection is mainly one of the most difficult problems faced by the plastic surgeons. In addition, donor–recipient compatibility is very important for the entire reconstruction method.[18],[19],[20]

The myocutaneous flap as a source of vascularized bone in reconstructive surgery is in wide use.

As it ensures more durable blood supply, also defect at the donor site can be primarily closed and provides tissue bulk to cover large defects.

HRQOL has nowadays become a constant provoking question in the assessment of any therapy in oncology. It is time-consuming and a challenging task to ensure patients' self-complete questionnaires before treatment and at regular intervals subsequently, thus a reliable method should be adopted for obtaining complete details of the patients' treatment with ease. Our research is using the UW QOL head and neck questionnaire version 4. In the original description, Hassan and Weymuller et al. stated the advantages of the UWQOL head and neck questionnaire as follows: (1) It is brief and self-administered, (2) it is multi-factorial, allowing sufficient detail to identify subtle change, (3) it provides questions specific to head and neck cancer, and (4) it allows no input from the health provider. In addition, UWQOL is a widely used questionnaire because it is short and easy for patients to complete themselves, thus making it perfect in a hectic outpatient setup. The current version 4 of the UWQOL questionnaire consists of 12 single question domains, these having different response options that are scaled evenly from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) according to the hierarchy of response. We carried out this study to determine the postoperative HRQOL of these patients and the possible relationship of reconstruction surgery.[20],[21],[22],[23],[24],[25],[26]

The oral specific questionnaire was able to better demonstrate the changes in QOL due to surgery. We can see that the highest score of UWQOL subscale in the present study was in recreation and shoulder domains. The average score was 73.84 ± 22.72 and 79.53 ± 22.46, respectively, and the patients scored high in pain (68.84 ± 28.30) and appearance (63 ± 19.78) domains, this indicates that mandible reconstruction with myocutaneous flap has little effect on pain domain. A noteworthy outcome was the relatively low scores of UWQOL subscales in this study which were in speech and swallowing domains. The average scores were 53.23 ± 27.50 and 48.69 ± 22.50, respectively, which indicated that mandible reconstruction with myocutaneous flap has a bad effect on speech and swallowing domains. At the same time, we found that patients satisfied with the appearance domains. This may be due to the PMMF as it provides comparatively satisfactory esthetic as well as functional reconstruction of mandible defects and thereby obtaining a better esthetic contour. Although a noteworthy result was that the lowest score of UWQOL was in chewing (46.15 ± 22.19) domain. This may be due to mandible defects have caused some teeth lost, thus resulting in disorientation of chewing function.[27],[28],[29],[30]

Patients believe that surgery has altered their oral functions to a larger extent. In the present study, questionnaires do not contain a section on the effect of the myocutaneous flap donor site on HRQOL and function. However, majority of the patients reported no serious or any complications in wound healing. A bit strain in shoulder was observed till the wound healing fully completed, after that no complaints were reported for donor site complications.[31],[32],[33] In addition, as the donor site is covered under clothes, it is well acceptable by the patients. The immediate postoperative donor site morbidity is measured less and is reported to be in a range between 15% and 55%. In our study, 21.42% of the patients, specifically males, reported problem of hairs at the defect site as hirsute chest skin is placed intraorally. Some studies have mentioned that apart from only surgery, the adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy resulted in reduced weight, altered salivary and physical functions. Furthermore, functions such as swallowing and chewing were not as same as before and problems of coughing and dry mouth increased. Of the 65 patients in our study, 46 (70.76%) were given radiotherapy and 19 patients (29.23%) were given both radiation and chemotherapy. Among them, 38 patients (58.46%) complained about loss of appetite, dry mouth, and weight loss after chemotherapy/radiotherapy or both. There were several limitations of this study. First, the sample size was limited and may not have had sufficient power to find more valid and proofed data. Second, we collected data after patient's treatment during their follow-up, the entire pre- and post-operative period was not precisely evaluated and so, we could not fully assess its impact on patient HRQOL over the entire treatment period.[34],[35],[36],[37]


  Conclusions Top


Oral cancer patients after mandible reconstruction with myocutaneous flap would have a significant influence on the patients' condition of life, particularly in patients' oral functions. In future oral cancer treatment, HRQOL should be accepted as an important outcome parameter, along with the conventional medical conclusions. Clinically, HRQOL should be used as part of oral cancer treatment. The societal and literary data showed a rather low education level, low economic condition, and low standard of living for most of the patients.[38]

Recent advances

Osteo myocutaneous flaps and free flaps are widely used nowadays for better esthetic appearance because of its thickness and bone uniformity, and to overcome the major bone defects as these flaps provide vascular bridge and soft tissue cover for intraoral defects.[38]

Acknowledgments

We are thankful to Dr. Ghanshyam Patel for his contribution in statistical analysis.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
  References Top

1.
Rajan R, Reddy S, Rajan R. The pectoralis major myocutaneous flap in head and neck reconstruction. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;49:368-73.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Ariyan S. The pectoralis major myocutaneous flap. A versatile flap for reconstruction in the head and neck. Plast Reconstr Surg 1979;63:73-81.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Kuntz AL, Weymuller EA Jr., Impact of neck dissection on quality of life. Laryngoscope 1999;109:1334-8.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Vartanian JG, Carvalho AL, Yueh B, Furia CL, Toyota J, McDowell JA, et al. Brazilian-Portuguese validation of the University of Washington quality of life questionnaire for patients with head and neck cancer. Head Neck 2006;28:1115-21.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Weymuller EA Jr., Alsarraf R, Yueh B, Deleyiannis FW, Coltrera MD. Analysis of the performance characteristics of the University of Washington quality of life instrument and its modification (UW-QOL-R). Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;127:489-93.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
D'cruz AK, Yueh B, Das AK, McDowell JA, Chaukar DA, Ernest AW. Validation of the University of Washington quality of life questionnaires for head and neck cancer patients in India. Indian J Cancer 2007;44:147-54.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
El-Deiry MW, Futran ND, McDowell JA, Weymuller EA Jr., Yueh B. Influences and predictors of long-term quality of life in head and neck cancer survivors. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009;135:380-4.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Hassan SJ, Weymuller EA Jr. Assessment of quality of life in head and neck cancer patients. Head Neck 1993;15:485-96.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Nazar G, Garmendia ML, Royer M, McDowell JA, Weymuller EA Jr., Yueh B. Spanish validation of the University of Washington quality of life questionnaire for head and neck cancer patients. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2010;143:801-7, 807.e1-2.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Chaukar DA, Das AK, Deshpande MS, Pai PS, Pathak KA, Chaturvedi P, et al. Quality of life of head and neck cancer patient: Validation of the European organization for research and treatment of cancer QLQ-C30 and European organization for research and treatment of cancer QLQ-H and N 35 in Indian patients. Indian J Cancer 2005;42:178-84.  Back to cited text no. 10
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
11.
Thomas L, Jones TM, Tandon S, Carding P, Lowe D, Rogers S. Speech and voice outcomes in oropharyngeal cancer and evaluation of the University of Washington quality of life speech domain. Clin Otolaryngol 2009;34:34-42.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Campbell BH, Spinelli K, Marbella AM, Myers KB, Kuhn JC, Layde PM. Aspiration, weight loss, and quality of life in head and neck cancer survivors. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;130:1100-3.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Nelke KH, Pawlak W, Gerber H, Leszczyszyn J. Head and neck cancer patients' quality of life. Adv Clin Exp Med 2014;23:1019-27.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
van Nieuwenhuizen AJ, Buffart LM, Brug J, Leemans CR, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM. The association between health related quality of life and survival in patients with head and neck cancer: A systematic review. Oral Oncol 2015;51:1-11.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Binenbaum Y, Amit M, Billan S, Cohen JT, Gil Z. Minimal clinically important differences in quality of life scores of oral cavity and oropharynx cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol 2014;21:2773-81.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Lango MN, Egleston B, Fang C, Burtness B, Galloway T, Liu J, et al. Baseline health perceptions, dysphagia, and survival in patients with head and neck cancer. Cancer 2014;120:840-7.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Chen AM, Daly ME, Vazquez E, Courquin J, Luu Q, Donald PJ, et al. Depression among long-term survivors of head and neck cancer treated with radiation therapy. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2013;139:885-9.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Gandhi AK, Roy S, Thakar A, Sharma A, Mohanti BK. Symptom burden and quality of life in advanced head and neck cancer patients: AIIMS study of 100 patients. Indian J Palliat Care 2014;20:189-93.  Back to cited text no. 18
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
19.
de Andrade FP, Biazevic MG, Toporcov TN, Togni J, de Carvalho MB, Antunes JL. Discriminant validity of the University of Washington quality of life questionnaire in the Brazilian context. Rev Bras Epidemiol 2012;15:781-9.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Epstein JB, Emerton S, Kolbinson DA, Le ND, Phillips N, Stevenson-Moore P, et al. Quality of life and oral function following radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Head Neck 1999;21:1-11.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Onakoya PA, Nwaorgu OG, Adenipekun AO, Aluko AA, Ibekwe TS. Quality of life in patients with head and neck cancers. J Natl Med Assoc 2006;98:765-70.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Oliveira KG, von Zeidler SV, Podestá JR, Sena A, Souza ED, Lenzi J, et al. Influence of pain severity on the quality of life in patients with head and neck cancer before antineoplastic therapy. BMC Cancer 2014;14:39.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Boyapati RP, Shah KC, Flood V, Stassen LF. Quality of life outcome measures using UW-QOL questionnaire v4 in early oral cancer/squamous cell cancer resections of the tongue and floor of mouth with reconstruction solely using local methods. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;51:502-7.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Ghazali N, Lowe D, Rogers SN. Enhanced patient reported outcome measurement suitable for head and neck cancer follow-up clinics. Head Neck Oncol 2012;4:32.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Melo Filho MR, Rocha BA, Pires MB, Fonseca ES, Freitas EM, Martelli Junior H, et al. Quality of life of patients with head and neck cancer. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2013;79:82-8.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Agarwal SK, Munjal M, Koul R, Agarwal R. Prospective evaluation of the quality of life of oral tongue cancer patients before and after the treatment. Ann Palliat Med 2014;3:238-43.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Psoter WJ, Aguilar ML, Levy A, Baek LS, Morse DE. A preliminary study on the relationships between global health/quality of life and specific head and neck cancer quality of life domains in Puerto Rico. J Prosthodont 2012;21:460-71.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Thomas L, Jones TM, Tandon S, Katre C, Lowe D, Rogers SN. An evaluation of the University of Washington quality of life swallowing domain following oropharyngeal cancer. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2008;265 Suppl 1:S29-37.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Lovell SJ, Wong HB, Loh KS, Ngo RY, Wilson JA. Impact of dysphagia on quality-of-life in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Head Neck 2005;27:864-72.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Wilson JA, Carding PN, Patterson JM. Dysphagia after nonsurgical head and neck cancer treatment: Patients' perspectives. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2011;145:767-71.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Nguyen NP, Frank C, Moltz CC, Vos P, Smith HJ, Karlsson U, et al. Impact of dysphagia on quality of life after treatment of head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;61:772-8.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Gritz ER, Carmack CL, de Moor C, Coscarelli A, Schacherer CW, Meyers EG, et al. First year after head and neck cancer: Quality of life. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:352-60.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Williamson JS, Ingrams D, Jones H. Quality of life after treatment of laryngeal carcinoma: A single centre cross-sectional study. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2011;93:591-5.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Rogers SN, Devine J, Lowe D, Shokar P, Brown JS, Vaugman ED. Longitudinal health-related quality of life after mandibular resection for oral cancer: A comparison between rim and segment. Head Neck 2004;26:54-62.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Yang W, Zhao S, Liu F, Sun M. Health-related quality of life after mandibular resection for oral cancer: Reconstruction with free fibula flap. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2014;19:e414-8.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Wang G, Ji W. Investigation of QOL after laryngectomy using the UW-QOL questionnaire with Chinese patients. Chin J Clin Oncol 2006;3:96-101.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Kandogan T, Sanal A. Quality of life, functional outcome, and voice handicap index in partial laryngectomy patients for early glottic cancer. BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord 2005;5:3.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
He Y, Zhu HG, Zhang ZY, He J, Sader R. Three-dimensional model simulation and reconstruction of composite total maxillectomy defects with fibula osteomyocutaneous flap flow-through from radial forearm flap. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009;108:e6-12.  Back to cited text no. 38
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Patients and Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusions
References
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed262    
    Printed6    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded1    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal