RATIONALE: Using a customized headrest to hold patients in one position may help doctors plan treatment for patients with head and neck cancer. It is not yet known whether a customized headrest is more effective than a standard headrest in holding patients still during radiation therapy. PURPOSE: This randomized clinical trial is studying a customized headrest to see how well it works compared with a standard headrest in holding patients still while undergoing radiation therapy for head and neck cancer.
OBJECTIVES: Primary * To evaluate and compare the treatment set-up accuracy of customized vs standard headrest in immobilizing patients undergoing radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. * To determine and compare patient comfort with the two immobilization techniques. Secondary * To evaluate radiation therapists' satisfaction with the two immobilization techniques. * To examine and compare the cost effectiveness of the two immobilization techniques. OUTLINE: This is a multicenter study. Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. * Arm I: Patients are immobilized using the standard thermoplastic four-point fixation mask and the standard headrest system. Patients undergo 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy as per standard of care. * Arm II: Patients are immobilized using the standard thermoplastic four-point fixation mask and the customized headrest system. Patients undergo 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy as per standard of care. Patients score their comfort using the Visual Analogue Scale during the course of radiotherapy. Radiation therapists complete an evaluation questionnaire for each treatment planning and procedure.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
40
Saint Luke's Hospital
Dublin, Ireland
Treatment set-up accuracy
Time frame: 2010
Patient comfort with the two immobilization techniques as assessed by a patient-scored Visual Analogue Scale
Time frame: 2010
Radiation therapists' satisfaction as assessed by a questionnaire
Time frame: 2010
Cost-effectiveness as assessed by resource implications of the two immobilization techniques
Time frame: 2010
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.