A patient-centered mobile health application to motivate use of genetic counseling among women with ovarian cancer: A pilot randomized controlled trial

Exploring family communication preferences in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and Lynch syndrome: a national Canadian survey

BACKGROUND

Individuals affected with cancer predisposition (CPS) syndromes such as BRCA1, BRCA2 or Lynch syndrome (LS) are at an elevated risk of multiple cancers. Identifying high-risk individuals is important if they are to access risk-reducing strategies. Interventions such as risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in carriers of BRCA pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants or regular colonoscopy for carriers of LS P/LP variants are highly effective and reduce mortality. Despite clear evidence that the identification of at-risk relatives has value, the uptake of cascade testing remains at approximately 50%. It is important to understand strategies and barriers to testing to facilitate communication in families identified as haveing a hereditary cancer syndrome, to improve uptake of counselling and testing.

METHOD

A national online survey of both Canadian probands (the first member in a family to have genetic testing and who were variant positive, regardless of a cancer diagnosis) and their at-risk relatives. Respondents were individuals affected with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) and LS. The survey was constructed based on a review of the literature and authors' feedback. Both open and closed-ended questions were used for items on demographic characteristics, risk perception, genetic test results and cancer diagnosis. Items on experiences with hereditary cancer risk communication, communication challenges, preferences and supports required were explored using a 5-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

Responses indicated a high level of acceptance for the proband's direct involvement in family communication with the support of a health care provider (67% among the probands given a family letter and 55-57% among those who were not given a family letter). Respondents without a personal history of cancer were more likely to endorse a health care professional's help with family communication compared to those with a personal history of cancer (p = 0.031). Preferences for family member outreach also varied by education level, annual income, marital status and geographic location. Similarities were noted between the probands and relatives on communication outreach preferences.

CONCLUSION

While the family-mediated approach to communication remains the standard across many cancer genetics programs, participants note that additional support is necessary for dissemination of result information among relatives. Because family dynamics and communication vary widely, alternative options that retain the probands' involvement in family communication but add support from a health care provider should be explored.

Cancer Patients' Perspectives and Requirements of Digital Health Technologies: A Scoping Literature Review

Digital health technologies have the potential to alleviate the increasing cancer burden. Incorporating patients' perspectives on digital health tools has been identified as a critical determinant for their successful uptake in cancer care. The main objective of this scoping review was to provide an overview of the existing evidence on cancer patients' perspectives and requirements for patient-facing digital health technologies. Three databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, Science Direct) were searched and 128 studies were identified as eligible for inclusion. Web-based software/platforms, mobile or smartphone devices/applications, and remote sensing/wearable technologies employed for the delivery of interventions and patient monitoring were the most frequently employed technologies in cancer care. The abilities of digital tools to enable care management, user-friendliness, and facilitate patient-clinician interactions were the technological requirements predominantly considered as important by cancer patients. The findings from this review provide evidence that could inform future research on technology-associated parameters influencing cancer patients' decisions regarding the uptake and adoption of patient-facing digital health technologies.

A pilot randomized controlled trial of an online intervention for Hodgkin lymphoma survivors to increase knowledge about late effects and recommended screening

BACKGROUND

Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) survivors who received chest radiotherapy are at risk for breast cancer and cardiovascular disease, but screening adherence is low. We assessed the acceptability/feasibility of a web-based educational intervention and its impact on knowledge of health risks and screening.

METHODS

HL survivors were randomized to either an interactive online educational intervention or handouts only. Surveys were completed at baseline and 3 months post-intervention. We described the acceptability/feasibility of the intervention and compared knowledge between groups.

RESULTS

Fifty-two HL survivors participated; 27 in the intervention group and 25 in the control group. Eighteen (66%) intervention participants completed the intervention and reported high acceptability (89-100%). At baseline, adherence to breast cancer screening was low across all participants. Post-intervention, those in the intervention group more often than controls correctly identified breast cancer and echocardiogram screening guidelines (35% vs. 28%, P = 0.02 and 82% vs. 52%, P = 0.04) and reported knowing how to address potential complications from cancer treatments (87% vs. 64%, P = 0.03). We detected no increase in screening behavior post-intervention.

CONCLUSION

Online education modules for high-risk HL survivors are an acceptable method to improve knowledge of health risks and screening guidelines. Future interventions should focus on improving screening uptake in this population.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Web-based learning can be useful in increasing cancer survivor knowledge of their unique risks and screening recommendations but does not necessarily change patient behavior. Involvement in a cancer survivorship program can help assess individual barriers and monitor uptake of screening.

The effect of a mobile application for patients living with gynaecological cancer on their physical and psychosocial adaptation

BACKGROUND

Education of patients with cancer and patient self-management allow better clinical outcomes using e-health or mobile health applications.

AIMS

To develop a mobile application to increase the physical and psychosocial adaptation for patients with gynecological cancer who are receiving chemotherapy and to investigate the effectiveness of the mobile application.

METHODS

This study was planned as a parallel, single-blind, pre-post test randomised controlled experimental study in which two groups (intervention-control) will be compared. A total of 52 gynecological cancer patients were planned to be included in the study.

FINDINGS

This study is in the protocol stage. Therefore, the results of the study have not yet been reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence-based information within JineOnkolojik Destek provides rich data on coping with chemotherapy. In addition, the visual and auditory elements, real patient stories and videos, and the ability to ask questions and receive counselling from the research team can positively affect the physical and psychosocial health of the cancer survivors.

Applying the framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions to increase family communication about hereditary cancer

Objective

Evaluate an intervention to increase family communication (FC) of positive hereditary cancer test results using the Framework for Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions (FDECI).

Methods

We developed 'programme theory' during the FDECI development phase by aligning intervention components with behavior change techniques (BCTs) and theoretical factors expected to improve FC. During the feasibility phase, we obtained feedback from 12 stakeholder interviews.

Results

Intervention components aligned with a total of 14 unique BCTs for which prior evidence links the BCT to theoretical factors that influence behavior change. Constructive stakeholder feedback included: more information desired, rewording to support autonomy by highlighting options, and improvements to navigation, visuals, and audio. Positive comments included: comprehensiveness of materials, modeling of conversations, and usefulness of the materials for helping a person prepare to share positive test results.

Conclusion

The first FDECI phases were helpful for improving the intervention and planning our ongoing effectiveness and future implementation phases.

Innovation

Our application of the FDECI is novel, including plans to test our 'programme theory' using coincidence analysis (CNA) to determine who accesses which intervention materials, how utilizing certain materials impact the aligned theoretical factors, and whether these in turn make a difference in the behavioral outcome.

The feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a self-advocacy serious game for women with advanced breast or gynecologic cancer

BACKGROUND

Cancer clinicians and systems aim to provide patient-centered care, but not all patients have the self-advocacy skills necessary to ensure their care reflects their needs and priorities. This study examines the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a self-advocacy serious game (an educational video game) intervention in women with advanced breast or gynecologic cancer.

METHODS

Women with recently diagnosed (<3 months) metastatic breast or advanced gynecologic cancer were randomized 2:1 to receive a tablet-based serious game (Strong Together) (n = 52) or enhanced care as usual (n = 26). Feasibility was based on recruitment, retention, data completion, and intervention engagement. Acceptability was assessed via a postintervention questionnaire and exit interview. Preliminary efficacy was assessed on the basis of change scores from baseline to 3 and 6 months in self-advocacy (Female Self-Advocacy in Cancer Survivorship Scale) using intention-to-treat analysis.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight women (55.1% with breast cancer; 44.9% with gynecologic cancer) were enrolled. Feasibility was demonstrated by satisfactory recruitment (69% approach-to-consent rate; 93% enroll-to-randomize rate), retention (90% and 86% at 3 and 6 months, respectively; 85% data completion), and intervention engagement (84% completed ≥75% of the game). Participants endorsed the intervention's (75%) and trial's (87%) acceptability. Participants in the intervention group experienced significant improvements in self-advocacy at 3 and 6 months compared to participants in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong Together is feasible and acceptable among women with advanced breast or gynecologic cancer. This intervention demonstrates promising evidence of clinical efficacy. A future confirmatory trial is warranted to test the efficacy of the intervention for patient and health system outcomes.

Usability and Satisfaction Testing of Game-Based Learning Avatar-Navigated Mobile (GLAm), an App for Cervical Cancer Screening: Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Barriers to cervical cancer screening in young adults include a lack of knowledge and negative perceptions of testing. Evidence shows that mobile technology reduces these barriers; thus, we developed a web app, Game-based Learning Avatar-navigated mobile (GLAm), to educate and motivate cervical cancer screening using the Fogg Behavioral Model as a theoretic guide. Users create avatars to navigate the app, answer short quizzes with education about cervical cancer and screening, watch videos of the screening process, and earn digital trophies.

OBJECTIVE

We tested ease of use, usefulness, and satisfaction with the GLAm app among young adults.

METHODS

This mixed methods study comprised a qualitative think-aloud play interview session and a quantitative survey study. Participants were cervical cancer screening-eligible US residents aged 21 to 29 years recruited through social media. Qualitative study participants explored the app in a think-aloud play session conducted through videoconference. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis to identify themes of ease of use, usefulness, and content satisfaction. Qualitative study participants and additional participants then used the app independently for 1 week and completed a web-based survey (the quantitative study). Ease of use, usefulness, and satisfaction were assessed using the validated Technology Acceptance Model and Computer System Usability Questionnaire adapted to use of an app. Mean (SD) scores (range 1-7) are presented.

RESULTS

A total of 23 individuals participated in one or both study components. The mean age was 25.6 years. A majority were cisgender women (21/23, 91%) and White (18/23, 78%), and 83% (19/23) had at least some secondary education. Nine participants completed the think-aloud play session. Direct content analysis showed desire for content that is concise, eases anxiety around screenings, and uses game features (avatars and rewards). Twenty-three individuals completed the quantitative survey study. Mean scores showed the app was perceived to be easy to use (mean score 6.17, SD 0.27) and moderately useful to increase cervical cancer screening knowledge and uptake (mean score 4.94, SD 0.27). Participants were highly satisfied with the app (mean score 6.21, SD 1.20).

CONCLUSIONS

Survey results showed participants were satisfied with the app format and found it easy to use. The app was perceived to be moderately useful to inform and motivate cervical cancer screening; notably, the screening reminder function was not tested in this study. Qualitative study results demonstrated the app's ability to ease anxiety about screening through demonstration of the screening process, and brevity of app components was favored. Interpretation of results is limited by the predominantly cisgender, White, and educated study population; additional testing in populations which historically have lower cervical cancer screening uptake is needed. A modified version of the app is undergoing efficacy testing in a randomized clinical trial.

Digital interventions for genomics and genetics education, empowerment, and service engagement: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patient-facing digital technologies may reduce barriers to and alleviate the burden on genetics services. However, no work has synthesised the evidence for patient-facing digital interventions for genomics/genetics education and empowerment, or to facilitate service engagement more broadly. It is also unclear which groups have been engaged by digital interventions.

AIM

This systematic review explores which existing patient-facing digital technologies have been used for genomics/genetics education and empowerment, or to facilitate service engagement, and for whom and for which purposes the interventions have been developed.

METHODS

The review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eight databases were searched for literature. Information was extracted into an Excel sheet and analysed in a narrative manner. Quality assessments were conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies were included, of which 21 were moderate or high quality. The majority (88%) were conducted in the United States of America or within a clinical setting (79%). More than half (63%) of the interventions were web-based tools, and almost all focussed on educating users (92%). There were promising results regarding educating patients and their families and facilitating engagement with genetics services. Few of the studies focussed on empowering patients or were community-based.

CONCLUSION

Digital interventions may be used to deliver information about genetics concepts and conditions, and positively impact service engagement. However, there is insufficient evidence related to empowering patients and engaging underserved communities or consanguineous couples. Future work should focus on co-developing content with end users and incorporating interactive features.

Digital Health Interventions for Adult Patients With Cancer Evaluated in Randomized Controlled Trials: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Digital care has become an essential component of health care. Interventions for patients with cancer need to be effective and safe, and digital health interventions must adhere to the same requirements.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify currently available digital health interventions developed and evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) targeting adult patients with cancer.

METHODS

A scoping review using the JBI methodology was conducted. The participants were adult patients with cancer, and the concept was digital health interventions. The context was open, and sources were limited to RCT effectiveness studies. The PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, Research Information Sharing Service, and KoreaMed databases were searched. Data were extracted and analyzed to achieve summarized results about the participants, types, functions, and outcomes of digital health interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 231 studies were reviewed. Digital health interventions were used mostly at home (187/231, 81%), and the web-based intervention was the most frequently used intervention modality (116/231, 50.2%). Interventions consisting of multiple functional components were most frequently identified (69/231, 29.9%), followed by those with the self-manage function (67/231, 29%). Web-based interventions targeting symptoms with the self-manage and multiple functions and web-based interventions to treat cognitive function and fear of cancer recurrence consistently achieved positive outcomes. More studies supported the positive effects of web-based interventions to inform decision-making and knowledge. The effectiveness of digital health interventions targeting anxiety, depression, distress, fatigue, health-related quality of life or quality of life, pain, physical activity, and sleep was subject to their type and function. A relatively small number of digital health interventions specifically targeted older adults (6/231, 2.6%) or patients with advanced or metastatic cancer (22/231, 9.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review summarized digital health interventions developed and evaluated in RCTs involving adult patients with cancer. Systematic reviews of the identified digital interventions are strongly recommended to integrate digital health interventions into clinical practice. The identified gaps in digital health interventions for cancer care need to be reflected in future digital health research.

Mobile Health Interventions and RCTs: Structured Taxonomy and Research Framework

Mobile Health Interventions (MHIs) have addressed a range of healthcare challenges and have been evaluated using Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) to establish clinical effectiveness. Using PRISMA we conducted a systematic literature review of RCTs for MHIs and identified 70 studies which were analyzed and classified using Nickerson-Varshney-Muntermann (NVM) taxonomy. From the resultant iterations of the taxonomy, we extracted insights from the categorized studies. RCTs cover a wide range of health conditions including chronic diseases, general wellness, unhealthy practices, family planning, end-of-life, and post-transplant care. The MHIs that were utilized by the RCTs were varied as well, although most studies did not find significant differences between MHIs and usual care. The challenges for MHI-based RCTs include the use of technologies, delayed outcomes, patient recruitment, patient retention, and complex regulatory requirements. These variances can lead to a higher rate of Type I/Type II errors. Further considerations are the impact of infrastructure, contextual and cultural factors, and reductions in the technological relevancy of the intervention itself. Finally, due to the delayed effect of most outcomes, RCTs of insufficient duration are unable to measure significant, lasting improvements. Using the insights from seventy identified studies, we developed a classification of existing RCTs along with guidelines for MHI-based RCTs and a research framework for future RCTs. The framework offers opportunities for (a) personalization of MHIs, (b) use of richer technologies, and (c) emerging areas for RCTs.

A systematic review of theory-informed strategies used in interventions fostering family genetic risk communication

BACKGROUND

Inherited risk is a family issue. Identifying family members who carry a pathogenic genetic variant that increases risk of cancers and other chronic diseases can be lifesaving for those affected.

OBJECTIVE

The research questions are: (1) which family communication frameworks have been applied, (2) how do intervention strategies employed map to these theories, and (3) to what extent were families receptive to these strategies and communication increased?

METHODS

Manuscripts published between January 2010 and August 2020 were searched in three databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science.

RESULTS

Nine intervention trials were identified. All interventions were evaluated in clinical genetic counseling contexts using at least one individual-level strategy (e.g. increase knowledge). Only three focused on dyadic conversations such as preparing for relatives' information needs.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review posed the question whether theoretically based approaches have been applied to foster family genetic risk communication. Greater attention needs to be paid to the utilization of dyadic level and family system level theories to guide intervention developments.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

We conclude by calling for accelerating and broadening the development of interventions to enable family communication about inherited risk that are theory-based, incorporate family-systems thinking, and are conducted outside of specialty clinic settings.

Interventions to improve delivery of cancer genetics services in the United States: A scoping review

PURPOSE

Interventions that decrease barriers and improve clinical processes can increase patient access to guideline-recommended cancer genetics services. We sought to identify and describe interventions to improve patient receipt of guideline-recommended cancer genetics services in the United States.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search in Ovid MEDLINE and Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science from January 1, 2000 to February 12, 2020. Eligible articles reported interventions to improve the identification, referral, genetic counseling (GC), and genetic testing (GT) of patients in the United States. We independently screened titles and abstracts and reviewed full-text articles. Data were synthesized by grouping articles by clinical process.

RESULTS

Of 44 included articles, 17 targeted identification of eligible patients, 14 targeted referral, 15 targeted GC, and 16 targeted GT. Patient identification interventions included universal tumor testing and screening of medical/family history. Referral interventions included medical record system adaptations, standardizing processes, and provider notifications. GC interventions included supplemental patient education, integrated GC within oncology clinics, appointment coordination, and alternative service delivery models. One article directly targeted the GT process by implementing provider-coordinated testing.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review identified and described interventions to improve US patients' access to and receipt of guideline-recommended cancer genetics services.

Knowledge and psychosocial impact of genetic counseling and multigene panel testing among individuals with ovarian cancer

In a sample of individuals with ovarian cancer, we aimed to (a) identify factors associated with the psychosocial impact of genetic counseling and multigene panel testing, (b) identify factors associated with cancer genetics knowledge, and (c) summarize patient-reported recommendations to improve the genetic counseling and multigene panel testing process. Eligible participants in this secondary analysis of quantitative and qualitative survey data were English-speaking adults with ovarian cancer. Psychosocial impact was assessed using the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) questionnaire. Knowledge of cancer genetics was assessed using the KnowGene scale. Significant predictors of MICRA and KnowGene scores were identified using multiple regression. Open-ended survey item responses were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Eighty-seven participants met eligibility criteria. A positive genetic test result was associated with greater adverse psychosocial impact (B = 1.13, p = 0.002). Older age (B = - 0.07, p = 0.044) and being a member of a minority racial or ethnic group (B = - 3.075, p = 0.033) were associated with lower knowledge, while a personal history of at least one other type of cancer (B = 1.975, p = 0.015) was associated with higher knowledge. In open-ended item responses, participants wanted clinicians to assist with family communication, improve result disclosure, and enhance patient and family understanding of results. A subset of individuals with ovarian cancer who receive a positive genetic test result may be at risk for adverse psychosocial outcomes. Tailored cancer genetics education is necessary to promote the equitable uptake of targeted ovarian cancer treatment and risk-reducing therapies. Interventions to enhance patient-clinician communication in this setting are a research priority.

Interventions Facilitating Family Communication of Genetic Testing Results and Cascade Screening in Hereditary Breast/Ovarian Cancer or Lynch Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Evidence-based guidelines recommend cascade genetic testing of blood relatives of known Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) or Lynch Syndrome (LS) cases, to inform individualized cancer screening and prevention plans. The study identified interventions designed to facilitate family communication of genetic testing results and/or cancer predisposition cascade genetic testing for HBOC and LS. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials that assessed intervention efficacy for these two outcomes. Additional outcomes were also recorded and synthesized when possible. Fourteen articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the narrative synthesis and 13 in the meta-analysis. Lack of participant blinding was the most common risk of bias. Interventions targeted HBOC (n = 5); both HBOC and LS (n = 4); LS (n = 3); or ovarian cancer (n = 2). All protocols (n = 14) included a psychoeducational and/or counseling component. Additional components were decision aids (n = 4), building communication skills (n = 4), or motivational interviewing (n = 1). The overall effect size for family communication was small (g = 0.085) and not significant (p = 0.344), while for cascade testing, it was small (g = 0.169) but significant (p = 0.014). Interventions show promise for improving cancer predisposition cascade genetic testing for HBOC and LS. Future studies should employ family-based approaches and include racially diverse samples.

Toward Integration of mHealth in Primary Care in the Netherlands: A Qualitative Analysis of Stakeholder Perspectives

Background: There is a growing need to structurally change the way chronic illness care is organized as health systems struggle to meet the demand for chronic care. mHealth technologies can alter traditional approaches to health care provision by stimulating self-management of chronically ill patients. The aim of this study was to understand the complex environment related to the introduction of mHealth solutions into primary care for chronic disease management while considering health system functioning and stakeholder views.

Methods: A transdisciplinary approach was used informed by the Interactive Learning and Action (ILA) methodology. Exploratory interviews (n = 5) were held with representatives of stakeholder groups to identify and position key stakeholders. Subsequently, professionals and chronically ill patients were consulted separately to elaborate on the barriers and facilitators in integration, using semi-structured interviews (n = 17) and a focus group (n = 6). Follow-up interviews (n = 5) were conducted to discuss initial findings of the stakeholder analysis.

Results: Most stakeholders, in particular primary care practitioners and patients, seem to have a supporting or mixed attitude toward integration of mHealth. On the other hand, several powerful stakeholders, including primary care information system developers and medical specialists are likely to show resistance or a lack of initiative toward mHealth integration. Main barriers to mHealth integration were a lack of interoperability with existing information systems; difficulties in financing mHealth implementation; and limited readiness in general practices to change. Potential enablers of integration included co-design of mHealth solutions and incentives for pioneers.

Conclusion: Stakeholders acknowledge the benefits of integrating mHealth in primary care. However, important barriers perceived by end-users prevent them to fully adopt and use mHealth. This study shows that the complexity of introducing mHealth into primary care calls for strategies encouraging collaboration between multiple stakeholders to enhance successful implementation.

Awareness of family health history in a predominantly young adult population

Family health history (FHH) is a key predictor of health risk and is universally important in preventive care. However, patients may not be aware of the importance of FHH, and thus, may fail to accurately or completely share FHH with health providers, thereby limiting its utility. In this study, we conducted an online survey of 294 young adults and employees based at a US university setting regarding their knowledge, sharing behaviors, and perceived importance of FHH, and use of electronic clinical tools to document and update FHH. We also evaluated two educational interventions (written and video) to promote knowledge about FHH and its importance to health. We found that 93% of respondents were highly aware of their FHH, though only 39% reported collecting it and 4% using an online FHH tool. Seventy-three percent of respondents, particularly women, had shared FHH with their doctor when prompted, and fewer had shared it with family members. Participants in the video group were significantly more likely to understand the benefits of FHH than those in the written group (p = 0.02). In summary, educational resources, either video or written, will be helpful to promote FHH collection, sharing, and use of online FHH tools.