IADR Abstract Archives
EVALUATION of an ORAL CARE PROGRAMME
Objectives: To evaluate the effect of an oral care programme for patients undergoing treatment for cancer in the head and neck region regarding mucositis.
Methods: Patients scheduled to undergo curative treatment for head and neck cancer are included in 5 regions in Sweden. All patients are advised to clean their teeth twice a day and to avoid smoking and alcohol. The patients are randomized to an intervention group or to a control group. Patients in the intervention group rinse with a sodium chloride/bicarbonate solution 5 times/day and record their oral hygiene measures and rinses in a diary. They visit the dental hygienist once a week for professional oral care and get a reinstruction in oral hygiene if needed. Patients in the control group follow ordinary routines (visit the dental hygienist once a week for professional oral care). Mucositis is scored using the Oral mucositis assessment scale (OMAS) at baseline, weekly during radiation therapy and 1 and 3 months post treatment.
Results: 62 dentate patients (48 men, 14 women), mean age 58 years have been included so far. 29 patients were randomized to the intervention group and 33 to the control group. The most common diagnoses in both groups were tonsil cancer and tongue base cancer (55% and 79%) and the most common treatment modality were RT+chemotherapy (45% intervention group and 61% control group). The mean scores for ulceration week 3-6 during RT was 1-1.9 points lower in the Intervention group compared with the Control group.
Conclusions: A lower degree of ulceration during treatment might decrease oral pain which in turn is positive for the patient’s ability to eat, drink and perform oral hygiene.
Methods: Patients scheduled to undergo curative treatment for head and neck cancer are included in 5 regions in Sweden. All patients are advised to clean their teeth twice a day and to avoid smoking and alcohol. The patients are randomized to an intervention group or to a control group. Patients in the intervention group rinse with a sodium chloride/bicarbonate solution 5 times/day and record their oral hygiene measures and rinses in a diary. They visit the dental hygienist once a week for professional oral care and get a reinstruction in oral hygiene if needed. Patients in the control group follow ordinary routines (visit the dental hygienist once a week for professional oral care). Mucositis is scored using the Oral mucositis assessment scale (OMAS) at baseline, weekly during radiation therapy and 1 and 3 months post treatment.
Results: 62 dentate patients (48 men, 14 women), mean age 58 years have been included so far. 29 patients were randomized to the intervention group and 33 to the control group. The most common diagnoses in both groups were tonsil cancer and tongue base cancer (55% and 79%) and the most common treatment modality were RT+chemotherapy (45% intervention group and 61% control group). The mean scores for ulceration week 3-6 during RT was 1-1.9 points lower in the Intervention group compared with the Control group.
Conclusions: A lower degree of ulceration during treatment might decrease oral pain which in turn is positive for the patient’s ability to eat, drink and perform oral hygiene.