A randomised controlled trial of a pilot intervention to encourage early presentation of oral cancer in high risk groups

Dental Institute, King's College London, London, UK.
Patient Education and Counseling (Impact Factor: 2.6). 04/2012; 88(2):241-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.03.015
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Prognosis for oral cancer is substantially improved when diagnosed early. This research aimed to evaluate an intervention to promote early presentation of oral cancer.
Participants were randomly assigned to a leaflet group (n = 42), a one-to-one group (n = 46) or a control group (n = 24). Participants in the leaflet group read a theory-based (Extended Self-Regulatory Model; Social Cognitive Theory) leaflet on how to spot oral cancer early. Those in the one-to-one group received a brief, interactional discussion on early presentation of oral cancer and were then asked to read the leaflet. Participants in the control group received no information about oral cancer.
The leaflet and the one-to-one instruction led to more accurate knowledge of oral cancer, decreased anticipated delay, and increased understanding, likelihood and confidence to perform self-examination. Neither intervention raised participants' anxiety. There were minimal differences between the two interventions, yet both were superior to the control group.
This piloting indicates the initial effectiveness of an brief intervention purposefully designed for people at risk of developing oral cancer.
A low cost intervention may be a useful tool to encourage early detection of oral cancer. This could be embedded into routine consultations or an early detection programme.


Available from: Beth Grunfeld, May 30, 2015
1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cancer of the oral cavity is a public health problem and many cases are not diagnosed until the disease has reached an advanced stage. The aim of this study was to initiate an educational programme in self-examination for patients at risk from oral cancer. This quasi-experimental study set out to initiate an educational programme in self-examination for patients at risk from oral cancer, assessing the outcomes after three months. In individual 15-minute face-to-face sessions, patients were given information and training in oral cancer risk factors and then verbal instructions as how to carry out oral self-examination. Three months later, patients were interviewed by telephone and asked if they had carried out self-examination independently at home. The programme was evaluated by means of a health belief model questionnaire on perceived susceptibility (3 items), severity (8 items), benefits (4 items), barriers (8 items) and efficacy (6 items). Eighty-six patients (37 females [43.1%] and 49 males [56.9%]) with a mean age of 58.60 ± 10.7 completed the oral self-examination programme. Logistic regression analysis indicated that patients who felt themselves subject to susceptibility (OR: 0.03 95% CI: 0.0-0.86; p < 0.04), severity (OR 0.23 95% 0.08-0.68; p < 0.008) and benefits (OR 0.11 95% 0.02-0.63; p < 0.013) were more likely to perform self-examination. Training programmes in oral self-examination are needed to decrease morbidity and mortality from oral cancer. © 2015 Australian Dental Association.
    Australian Dental Journal 03/2015; 60(1):59-64. DOI:10.1111/adj.12274 · 1.48 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives Oral cancer usually occurs at accessible sites, enabling early detection by visual inspection. Fanconi anemia (FA) is a recessive disorder associated with a high risk of developing head and neck solid tumors. The aim of this study was to assess the ability to perform mouth self-examination in these patients. Materials and methods Forty-four patients with FA aged ≥ 18 years were self-reported questionnaire to collect sociodemographic data and information about health-related behaviors and oral cancer awareness. They were asked to perform MSE which was evaluated using criteria for mucosal visualization and retracting ability. Subsequently, an oral medicine specialist clinically examined all subjects, and these findings were considered to be the gold standard. Results The accuracy values of MSE were 43% and 44%, respectively. The MSE accuracy was 43%. Most (73%) patients reported that MSE was easy or very easy, although 75% showed insufficient performance. Conclusion The accuracy of MSE alone are not sufficient to indicate whether MSE should be recommended as a strategy to prevent oral cancer in patients with FA. Nevertheless, the present results indicate that this inexpensive technique could be used as a tool for early detection of cancer in these patients.
    Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology 10/2014; 118(4). DOI:10.1016/j.oooo.2014.06.012 · 1.46 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This systematic review summarised the literature on patient acceptability of screening for oral cancer outside dental care settings. A comprehensive search of relevant literature was performed in EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHAL, psycINFO, CANCERLIT and BNI to identify relevant articles published between 1975 and Dec 2013. Studies reporting acceptability of oral cancer screening to undiagnosed individuals attending non-dental settings were eligible for inclusion. A total of 2935 references were initially identified from the computerised search but 2217 were excluded after screening the titles. From the abstracts of the remaining 178 articles, 47 full text articles were retrieved for further scrutiny, and 12 studies were found to be eligible for inclusion. In these studies, knowledge about oral cancer, anxiety related to the screening process, preference for care provision, and financial cost were influencing factors for the acceptance of screening. Written information provided to patients in primary care was reported to boost immediate knowledge levels of oral cancer, lessen anxiety, and increase intentions for screening. The majority of screening methods were entirely acceptable to patients; lack of acceptability from the patients’ viewpoint was not a significant barrier to carrying out opportunistic screening of high-risk populations. In conclusion, the available evidence suggests that acceptance of, and satisfaction with oral cancer screening is high, particularly where patients have previously been educated about oral cancer. Further research focusing on patient’s preferences would enable streamlining of the approach to oral cancer screening taken by any national programme.
    Oral Oncology 10/2014; 50(10). DOI:10.1016/j.oraloncology.2014.07.007 · 3.03 Impact Factor