Premium
Prophylaxis and management of acute radiation‐induced skin toxicity: a survey of practice across E urope and the USA
Author(s) -
O'Donovan A.,
Coleman M.,
Harris R.,
Herst P.
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
european journal of cancer care
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.849
H-Index - 67
eISSN - 1365-2354
pISSN - 0961-5423
DOI - 10.1111/ecc.12213
Subject(s) - medicine , toxicity , radiation therapy , adverse effect , clinical practice , consistency (knowledge bases) , clinical trial , systematic review , radiation oncology , medline , intensive care medicine , family medicine , surgery , pathology , pharmacology , geometry , mathematics , political science , law
Radiation‐induced toxicity is a common adverse side effect of radiation therapy. Previous studies have demonstrated a lack of evidence to support common skincare advice for radiotherapy patients. The aim of the current study was to investigate the management of radiation‐induced skin toxicity across E urope and the USA . Where previous surveys have focused on national practice or treatment of specific sites, the current study aimed to gain a broader representation of skincare practice. An anonymous online survey investigating various aspects of radiotherapy skincare management was distributed to departments across E urope and the USA ( n = 181/737 responded i.e. 25%). The UK was excluded as a similar survey was carried out in 2011. The results highlight the lack of consistency in both the prevention and management of radiation‐induced skin toxicity. Recommended products are often not based on evidence‐based practice. Examples include the continued use of aqueous cream and gentian violet, as well as the recommendations on washing restrictions during treatment. To our knowledge, this is the most extensive survey to date on the current management of radiation‐induced skin toxicity. This study highlights significant disparities between clinical practice and research‐based evidence published in recent systematic reviews and guidelines. Ongoing large prospective randomised trials are urgently needed.