Integration of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Clinical Practice for Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Cross-Sectional Survey

Background: Head and neck cancer (HNC) and its multimodal treatment substantially impair speech, swallowing, breathing, appearance, and psychosocial well-being. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) improve symptom monitoring and quality of life in oncology, yet their integration into routine HNC care remains inconsistent. This study assessed patterns of PROM use, perceived value, and barriers to implementation among healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in HNC care. Methods: A 30-item cross-sectional survey was distributed to HCPs treating HNC patients between June 2024 and April 2025. The questionnaire explored PROM use in clinical practice and trials, perceived relevance across care phases, and implementation barriers. Respondents were classified as non-users, occasional users, or regular users. Data were analyzed descriptively with comparisons between groups. Results: Among 133 respondents, 33.8% were non-users, 29.3% occasional users, and 36.8% regular users of PROMs. Users reported inviting half of patients to complete PROMs, predominantly via paper-based questionnaires (67.8%). PROMs were mainly applied during active treatment and early follow-up to monitor symptoms, overall health, and emotional well-being, and were less frequently used to guide treatment decisions. The EORTC QLQ-C30 and HNC-specific tools were most commonly reported. Compared with users, non-users more often cited lack of time, limited training in interpreting PROM data, insufficient institutional support, resource constraints, and lack of appropriate instruments (all p < 0.05). PROM use in clinical trials was associated with routine use (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Although PROMs are widely valued in HNC care, their integration into clinical decision-making remains limited. Addressing organizational, educational, and digital barriers is essential to support sustainable implementation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Current Oncology
Published
2026-05-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol33050275
Primary Topic
Head and Neck Cancer Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Integration of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Clinical Practice for Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Cross-Sectional Survey

Gerardo Petruzzi, Arnaud Beddok, Daan Nevens, Bartłomiej Tomasik et al.
Current Oncology
Head and Neck Cancer Studies
article

Integration of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Clinical Practice for Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Cross-Sectional Survey

Gerardo Petruzzi, Arnaud Beddok, Daan Nevens, Bartłomiej Tomasik, Laurelie R. Wishart, Yannick Eller, Luigi Lorini, Chiara Gottardi, Niclas Hubel, Giuseppe Fanetti, Francesca Caparrotti, Tihana Gašpert, Vincent Bourbonne, Csongor György Lengyel, Ana Varges Gomes, Esmée L. Looman, Jens Lehmann, Renée Bultijnck, Sophie Veldhuijzen van Zanten, Fatjona Kraja, Katherine J. Taylor, Ruth Gabriela Herrera Gómez, Petr Szturz, Iyizoba-Ebozue Zsuzsanna, Stefano Cavalieri, Emma Lidington, Marc Oliva, Jesus Brenes Castro, Tatiana Dragan, Maria Pilar Solis Hernandez
article en

Abstract

Background: Head and neck cancer (HNC) and its multimodal treatment substantially impair speech, swallowing, breathing, appearance, and psychosocial well-being. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) improve symptom monitoring and quality of life in oncology, yet their integration into routine HNC care remains inconsistent. This study assessed patterns of PROM use, perceived value, and barriers to implementation among healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in HNC care. Methods: A 30-item cross-sectional survey was distributed to HCPs treating HNC patients between June 2024 and April 2025. The questionnaire explored PROM use in clinical practice and trials, perceived relevance across care phases, and implementation barriers. Respondents were classified as non-users, occasional users, or regular users. Data were analyzed descriptively with comparisons between groups. Results: Among 133 respondents, 33.8% were non-users, 29.3% occasional users, and 36.8% regular users of PROMs. Users reported inviting half of patients to complete PROMs, predominantly via paper-based questionnaires (67.8%). PROMs were mainly applied during active treatment and early follow-up to monitor symptoms, overall health, and emotional well-being, and were less frequently used to guide treatment decisions. The EORTC QLQ-C30 and HNC-specific tools were most commonly reported. Compared with users, non-users more often cited lack of time, limited training in interpreting PROM data, insufficient institutional support, resource constraints, and lack of appropriate instruments (all p < 0.05). PROM use in clinical trials was associated with routine use (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Although PROMs are widely valued in HNC care, their integration into clinical decision-making remains limited. Addressing organizational, educational, and digital barriers is essential to support sustainable implementation.

Current OncologyVol. 33(5)
Griffith University (AU), National Health Service (GB), University of Medicine Tirana (AL), Université Libre de Bruxelles (BE), University of Antwerp (BE), University of Rijeka (HR), Inserm (FR), Université de Bretagne Occidentale (FR), The University of Queensland (AU), Queen Mary University of London (GB), University of Dundee (GB), University of Milan (IT), Universität Innsbruck (AT), Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE), AZ Groeninge (BE), Mother Teresa Hospital (AL), Institut Jules Bordet (BE), Erasmus MC (NL), Ghent University (BE), University of Maribor (SI), Institut d'Investigació Biomédica de Bellvitge (ES), Institut d'Imagerie Biomédicale (FR), University Hospital of Zurich (CH), Fribourg Development Agency (CH), Institut Català d'Oncologia (ES), Istituto Oncologico Veneto (IT), Administração Regional de Saúde de Lisboa e Vale do Tejo (PT), National Institute of Oncology (HU), Rostock University of Music and Theatre (DE), Centro di Riferimento Oncologico (IT), Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias (ES), National Cancer Institute (MY), Erasmus MC Cancer Institute (NL), Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IT), Institut Jean Godinot (FR), University Medical Centre Mannheim (DE), Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori (IT), Générale-Beaulieu Clinic (CH), IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital (IT), University of Rostock (DE), University of Tirana (AL), University of Algarve (PT), Gdańsk Medical University (PL), Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL), Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne (FR), University of Lausanne (CH)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Head and Neck Cancer Studies
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.