Christopher W Noel1, David Forner2, Douglas B Chepeha3, Elif Baran4, Kelvin K W Chan5, Ambica Parmar5, Zain Husain6, Irene Karam6, Julie Hallet7, Natalie G Coburn8, Antoine Eskander9. 1. Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (IHPME), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2. Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (IHPME), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Division of Otolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. 3. Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Otolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery/Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 4. Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 5. Department of Medical Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 7. Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (IHPME), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 8. Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (IHPME), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Surgical Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 9. Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (IHPME), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Surgical Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and Michael Garron Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: antoine.eskander@mail.utoronto.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Symptom burden is common in head and neck cancer patients though it frequently remains undetected and untreated. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System - revised version (ESAS-r) is a generic symptom scale deployed in many outpatient settings worldwide. The ESAS-r is meant to improve symptom detection and management. We sought to review the ESAS-r and its psychometric properties in a head and neck oncology population. METHODS: Narrative Review. RESULTS: Over the past 30 years, the ESAS-r has emerged as one of the most used symptom scales for cancer patients. Its psychometric properties in a heterogenous cancer population are well supported, proving to be reliable and valid in a variety of settings. The linking of ESAS-r scores with Ontario administrative health data has led to a detailed assessment of validity in head and neck cancer. The ESAS-r can discriminate between high and low levels of symptom burden and is responsive to change over time in this patient population. ESAS-r scores have also been shown to be a strong predictor of future emergency department use and unplanned hospitalization in head and neck cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS: The ESAS-r is reliable and valid in the head and neck cancer population and may serve as a useful clinical endpoint in research studies.
OBJECTIVE: Symptom burden is common in head and neck cancer patients though it frequently remains undetected and untreated. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System - revised version (ESAS-r) is a generic symptom scale deployed in many outpatient settings worldwide. The ESAS-r is meant to improve symptom detection and management. We sought to review the ESAS-r and its psychometric properties in a head and neck oncology population. METHODS: Narrative Review. RESULTS: Over the past 30 years, the ESAS-r has emerged as one of the most used symptom scales for cancer patients. Its psychometric properties in a heterogenous cancer population are well supported, proving to be reliable and valid in a variety of settings. The linking of ESAS-r scores with Ontario administrative health data has led to a detailed assessment of validity in head and neck cancer. The ESAS-r can discriminate between high and low levels of symptom burden and is responsive to change over time in this patient population. ESAS-r scores have also been shown to be a strong predictor of future emergency department use and unplanned hospitalization in head and neck cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS: The ESAS-r is reliable and valid in the head and neck cancer population and may serve as a useful clinical endpoint in research studies.
Authors: Christopher W Noel; Rinku Sutradhar; Lesley Gotlib Conn; David Forner; Wing C Chan; Rui Fu; Julie Hallet; Natalie G Coburn; Antoine Eskander Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2022-08-01 Impact factor: 8.961
Authors: Christopher W Noel; Yue Jennifer Du; Elif Baran; David Forner; Zain Husain; Kevin M Higgins; Irene Karam; Kelvin K W Chan; Julie Hallet; Frances Wright; Natalie G Coburn; Antoine Eskander; Lesley Gotlib Conn Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 8.961