Telemedicine-enabled biofeedback electropalatography rehabilitation (TEBER): A pilot study for patients treated with surgery for oral cavity carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: To address the rehabilitative barriers to frequency and precision of care, we conducted a pilot study of a biofeedback electropalatography (EPG) device paired with telemedicine for patients who underwent primary surgery +/- adjuvant radiation for oral cavity carcinoma. We hypothesized that lingual optimization followed by telemedicine-enabled biofeedback electropalatography rehabilitation (TEBER) would further improve speech and swallowing outcomes after "standard-of-care" SOC rehabilitation. METHOD: Pilot prospective 8-week (TEBER) program following 8 weeks of (SOC) rehabilitation. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were included and 11 completed the protocol. When examining the benefit of TEBER independent of standard of care, "range-of-liquids" improved by +0.36 [95% CI, 0.02-0.70, p = 0.05] and "range-of-solids" improved by +0.73 [95% CI, 0.12-1.34, p = 0.03]. There was a positive trend toward better oral cavity obliteration; residual volume decreased by -1.2 [95% CI, -2.45 to 0.053, p = 0.06], and "nutritional-mode" increased by +0.55 [95% CI, -0.15 to 1.24, p = 0.08]. CONCLUSION: This pilot suggests that TEBER bolsters oral rehabilitation after 8 weeks of SOC lingual range of motion.

Glossectomy for the treatment of oral cavity carcinoma: Quantitative, functional and patient-reported quality of life outcomes differ by four glossectomy defects.

OBJECTIVE: The goal was to characterize four clinically distinct glossectomy defects to establish significant quantitative cut points using functional metrics, the MD Anderson Dysphagia Index (MDADI) and speech intelligibility. METHODS: Population included 101 patients treated with surgery, adjuvant radiation per NCCN guidelines, and ≥ 12 months follow-up. RESULTS: Defect groups: subtotal hemiglossectomy (1), hemiglossectomy (2), extended hemiglossectomy (3) and oral glossectomy (4) were compared: All outcomes supported a four defect model. Intergroup comparison of outcomes with subtotal hemiglossectomy as reference (p value): Tongue Protrusion <0.001,<0.001,<0.001; Elevation <0.001,<0.001,<0.001; Open Mouth Premaxillary Contact Elevation <0.001,<0.001,<0.001; Obliteration 0.6,<0.001,<0.001; Normalcy of Diet, <0.3,<0.001,<0.001; Nutritional Mode, <0.9,<0.8,<0.001; Range of Liquids, <0.4,<0.016,<0.02; Range of Solids, <0.5,<0.004,<0.001; Eating in Public, <0.2,<0.002,<0.03; Understandability of Speech, <0.9,<0.001,<0.001; Speaking in Public, <0.4,<0.03,<0.001; MDADI, <0.4,<0.005,<0.01; Single Word Intelligibility, <0.4,<0.1,<0.001; Sentence Intelligibility, <0.5,<0.08,<0.001; Words Per Minute Intelligibility, <0.6,<0.04,<0.001; Sentence Efficiency Ratio, <0.4,<0.03,<0.002. Proportion of patients by 4 defect groups who underwent: tissue transplantation, 51%,93.9%,100%,100%.Radiation,24%,67%,88%,80%.Between hemiglossectomy and extended hemiglossectomy, the defect extends into the contralateral floor of the mouth and/or the anterior tonsillar pillar; resection of these subunits limits tongue mobility with an impact on functional outcome and MDADI. Between extended hemiglossectomy and oral glossectomy, the defect extends to include the tip of the tongue and appears to impact functional outcome and MDADI. CONCLUSIONS: Subtotal hemiglossectomy, hemiglossectomy, extended glossectomy and oral glossectomy are associated with quantitative (elevation, protrusion, open mouth premaxillary contact and obliteration), qualitative (speech and swallowing) and MDADI differences, suggesting that these 4 ordinal defect groups are distinct.