Current aspects of the quality of head and neck cancer care: survey of the Scandinavian Society for Head and Neck Oncology

Background: All Nordic countries have national cancer registries collecting data on head and neck cancer (HNC) incidence and survival. However, there is a lack of consensus on how other quality aspects should be monitored. Aims: We conducted a web-based survey to find opportunities for quality control and improvement. Methods: A web-based survey was sent to one otorhinolaryngology–head and neck (ORL–HN) surgeon, and one oncologist at each Nordic university hospital treating HNC. In total, 42 responses from all 21 university hospitals were included. Results: In over half of the university hospitals, an oncologist, an ORL—HN surgeon, a pathologist, a radiologist, and a specialized nurse was always present at the multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) meeting. Of 42 respondents 35 (83%) agreed that treatment delays were systematically recorded for each patient. Eleven of 21 (52%) oncologists agreed that side-effects of (chemo)radiotherapy were systematically recorded. Less than half of the respondents agreed that complications of surgery, and post-treatment quality of life (QOL) were systematically recorded. Conclusions: In the Nordic countries, the importance of HNC treatment timelines is well acknowledged. There is a lack of consensus on the composition of MTB meeting, and how treatment-related morbidity should be monitored outside clinical trials.