The Laryngoscope · 2018
The Role of Maxillofacial Prosthetics for the Surgically Treated Patient at National Cancer Institute-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rosen Evan B, Palin Charles L, Huryn Joseph M, Wong Richard J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The current role of maxillofacial prosthetic care for head and neck cancer patients is not well understood. Additionally, perceived barriers for service provision are unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current role of maxillofacial prosthetic care at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated comprehensive cancer centers and to identify perceived barriers to care.
STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, cross-sectional survey of head and neck division leaders at NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers.
METHODS: Each head and neck division leader from the 47 NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers was invited to participate. The main outcomes of this study were: 1) to evaluate the current role of maxillofacial prosthetics for the surgically treated head and neck cancer patient within NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers and 2) to identify perceived barriers to care. Measured outcomes were obtained from an anonymous online survey and reported.
RESULTS: Twenty-eight of the 47 head and neck service chiefs responded (60% response rate). Respondents expressed preference for prosthetic rehabilitation for hard palate/upper gum, auricular, and nasal defects. Local flap or free tissue transfer was preferred for lower gum and soft palate defects. Cost-related factors were among the most reported perceived barriers to maxillofacial prosthetic care.
CONCLUSIONS: Maxillofacial prosthetics have an important role in the rehabilitation of the head and neck cancer patient. Perceived barriers for services exist, particularly as it relates to cost. Providers should be aware that these issues are likely to be more severe in regional or community centers.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 129:409-414, 2019.
STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, cross-sectional survey of head and neck division leaders at NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers.
METHODS: Each head and neck division leader from the 47 NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers was invited to participate. The main outcomes of this study were: 1) to evaluate the current role of maxillofacial prosthetics for the surgically treated head and neck cancer patient within NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers and 2) to identify perceived barriers to care. Measured outcomes were obtained from an anonymous online survey and reported.
RESULTS: Twenty-eight of the 47 head and neck service chiefs responded (60% response rate). Respondents expressed preference for prosthetic rehabilitation for hard palate/upper gum, auricular, and nasal defects. Local flap or free tissue transfer was preferred for lower gum and soft palate defects. Cost-related factors were among the most reported perceived barriers to maxillofacial prosthetic care.
CONCLUSIONS: Maxillofacial prosthetics have an important role in the rehabilitation of the head and neck cancer patient. Perceived barriers for services exist, particularly as it relates to cost. Providers should be aware that these issues are likely to be more severe in regional or community centers.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 129:409-414, 2019.