Gaps in Depression Symptom Management for Patients With Head and Neck Cancer

Christopher W Noel,Rinku Sutradhar,Wing C Chan,Rui Fu,Justine Philteos,David Forner,Jonathan C Irish,Simone Vigod,Elie Isenberg-Grzeda,Natalie G Coburn,Julie Hallet,Antoine Eskander
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.30595
Abstract:Objective: To understand practice patterns and identify care gaps within a large-scale depression screening program for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). Study design: Retrospective cohort study. Methods: This was a population-based study of adults diagnosed with a HNC between January 2007 and October 2020. Each patient was observed from time of first symptom assessment until end of study date, or death. The exposure of interest was a positive depressive symptom screen on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS). Outcomes of interest included psychiatry/psychology assessment, social work referral, or palliative care assessment. Cause specific hazard models with a time-varying exposure were used to investigate the exposure-outcome relationships. Results: Of 14,054 patients with HNC, 9016 (64.2%) reported depressive symptoms on at least one ESAS assessment. Within 60 days of first reporting depressive symptoms, 223 (2.7%) received a psychiatry assessment, 646 (7.9%) a social work referral, and 1131 (13.9%) a palliative care assessment. Rates of psychiatry/psychology assessment (HR 3.15 [95% CI 2.67-3.72]), social work referral (HR 1.83 [95% CI 1.64-2.02]), and palliative care assessment (HR 2.34 [95% CI 2.19-2.50]) were higher for those screening positive for depression. Certain patient populations were less likely to receive an assessment including the elderly, rural residents, and those without a prior psychiatric history. Conclusion: A high proportion of head and neck patients report depressive symptoms, though this triggers a referral in a small number of cases. These data highlight areas for improvement in depression screening care pathways. Level of evidence: 3 Laryngoscope, 133:2638-2646, 2023.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?