Premium
Impact of comorbidity on therapeutic decision‐making in head and neck cancer: Audit from a comprehensive cancer center in India
Author(s) -
Baijal Gunjan,
Gupta Tejpal,
Hotwani Chandni,
Laskar Sarbani Ghosh,
Budrukkar Ashwini,
Murthy Vedang,
Agarwal Jai Prakash
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
head and neck
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.012
H-Index - 127
eISSN - 1097-0347
pISSN - 1043-3074
DOI - 10.1002/hed.21897
Subject(s) - comorbidity , medicine , head and neck cancer , audit , incidence (geometry) , cancer , correlation , physics , geometry , mathematics , management , optics , economics
Background Head and neck cancer has increased incidence of comorbidity due to tobacco and alcohol use. Methods Two hundred consecutive patients were included in this cross‐sectional study. Data on clinico‐demographic characteristics and comorbidity was extracted from case records. Comorbidity was assessed with Adult Comorbidity Evaluation 27 (ACE‐27) and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Change in therapeutic decision‐making from institutional evidence‐based guidelines was classified as low, medium, or high‐impact. Results Of 200 patients, 68(34%) had comorbidity while 15 had multimorbidity. No change in therapeutic decision‐making was seen in 139 patients (69.5%), 61patients (30.5%) had change from institutional evidence‐based guidelines. There was strong positive correlation (Spearman's correlation coefficient = 0.80; p < .001) between ACE‐27 and change in therapeutic decision‐making. For CCI, there was moderate positive correlation (Spearman's correlation coefficient = 0.50; p < .001). Conclusion Comorbidity in patients with head and neck cancer can influence therapeutic decision‐making. Prospective longitudinal rigorous collection of comorbidity data is warranted for correlation with outcomes. ACE‐27 may be a clinically more meaningful tool for comorbidity assessment. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck, 2012