Incorporating Multiple Perspectives Into the Development of an Electronic Survivorship Platform for Head and Neck Cancer

Digital health in head and neck cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Digital health tools are increasingly being recognised as effective interventions in monitoring chronic health conditions. This systematic review addressed how digital health is currently utilised in patients with head and neck cancer as an adjunct to care.

METHOD

Studies of the development or evaluation of an eHealth, telemedicine or telemonitoring tool were eligible. A narrative synthesis was performed as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies of digital health tools in head and neck cancer were identified. Nine were randomised, controlled trials but most had concern of bias. Fourteen (48 per cent) of the interventions used multiple modes of delivery. The primary digital tool functions are symptom tracking and self-care, prehabilitation and rehabilitation, psychological support, and education, including decision aids. Most tools aimed to support patients during active cancer treatment.

CONCLUSION

There are a small number of digital health tools for head and neck cancer patients; however, there is a lack of well-designed randomised, controlled trials to demonstrate effectiveness.

Establishing a usability cut-point for the Health Information Technology Usability Evaluation Scale (Health-ITUES)

OBJECTIVE

The Health Information Technology Usability Evaluation Scale (Health-ITUES) is a validated and reliable instrument to evaluate usability of information technology (IT) tools. In this study, we aimed to establish the optimal cut-point of the Health-ITUES to identify usability of IT tools.

METHODS

Adult participants were recruited to a trial evaluating a mobile app for self-managing HIV. Participants completed the Health-ITUES at the 3- and 6-month follow-up. Health-ITUES is a 20-item questionnaire that assesses four subscales: impact, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user control. The total score ranged from 1 to 5 and a higher score indicates greater usability. App use was defined as the proportion of activities completed by participants in both study arms. The selection of an optimal cut-point involved a series of multiple linear regression models with 500 bootstrap replications to examine the relationship between the Health-ITUES total score and app use, controlling for potential covariates.

RESULTS

We included 158 participants; mean age was 49.7 years (SD 10.3), 71% were African American/Black, and 72% were non-Hispanic. Mean Health-ITUES total scores at 3 and 6 months were 4.39 (SD 0.75) and 4.43 (SD 0.75), respectively. App use completedby participants from baseline to the 3-month follow-up visits was 0.61 (SD 0.36, range 0-1.72) and from 3-month to the 6-month follow-up visits was 0.51 (SD 0.37). Participants who reported greater Health-ITUES total score completed more activities [β = 0.18, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.10-0.27]. The optimal cut-point of 4.32 (95% CI: 4.25-4.56) yielded the lowest p-value to identify usability of IT tools.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of adults with HIV, we identified an optimal cut-point of 4.32 on the Health-ITUES total score to define usability. Further studies are needed to validate this cut-point.

Health information technology to support cancer survivorship care planning: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The study sought to conduct a systematic review to explore the functions utilized by electronic cancer survivorship care planning interventions and assess their effects on patient and provider outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines, studies published from January 2000 to January 2020 were identified in PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsychINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, and the ACM Digital Library . The search combined terms for cancer, survivorship, care planning, and health information technology (HIT). Eligible studies evaluated the effects of a HIT intervention on usability, knowledge, process, or health-related outcomes. A total of 578 abstracts were reviewed, resulting in 60 manuscripts describing 40 studies. Thematic analyses were used to define meta-themes of system functions, and Fisher's exact tests were used to examine associations between functions and outcomes.

RESULTS

Patients were the target end users for 18 interventions, while 12 targeted providers and 10 targeted both groups. Interventions used patient-reported outcomes collection (60%), automated content generation (58%), electronic sharing (40%), persistent engagement (28%), and communication features (20%). Overall, interventions decreased the time to create survivorship care plans (SCPs) and supported care planning knowledge and abilities, but results were mixed for effects on healthcare utilization, SCP sharing, and provoking anxiety. Persistent engagement features were associated with improvements in health or quality-of-life outcomes (17 studies, P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

Features that engaged users persistently over time were associated with better health and quality-of-life outcomes. Most systems have not capitalized on the potential of HIT to share SCPs across a care team and support care coordination.

Substance use and mental health burden in head and neck and other cancer survivors: A National Health Interview Survey analysis

BACKGROUND

Tobacco dependence, alcohol abuse, depression, distress, and other adverse patient-level influences are common in head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors. Their interrelatedness and precise burden in comparison with survivors of other cancers are poorly understood.

METHODS

National Health Interview Survey data from 1997 to 2016 were pooled. The prevalence of adverse patient-level influences among HNC survivors and matched survivors of other cancers were compared using descriptive statistics. Multivariable logistic regressions evaluating covariate associations with the primary study outcomes were performed. These included 1) current cigarette smoking and/or heavy alcohol use (>14 drinks per week) and 2) high mental health burden (severe psychological distress [Kessler Index ≥ 13] and/or frequent depressive/anxiety symptoms).

RESULTS

In all, 918 HNC survivors and 3672 matched survivors of other cancers were identified. Compared with other cancer survivors, more HNC survivors were current smokers and/or heavy drinkers (24.6% [95% CI, 21.5%-27.7%] vs 18.0% [95% CI, 16.6%-19.4%]) and exhibited a high mental health burden (18.6% [95% CI, 15.7%-21.5%] vs 13.0% [95% CI, 11.7%-14.3%]). In multivariable analyses, 1) a high mental health burden predicted for smoking and/or heavy drinking (odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.9), and 2) current cigarette smoking predicted for a high mental health burden (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.3). Furthermore, nonpartnered marital status and uninsured/Medicaid insurance status were significantly associated with both cigarette smoking and/or heavy alcohol use (ORs, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.4-2.5] and 1.5 [95% CI, 1.0-2.1], respectively) and a high mental health burden (ORs, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.1 -1.8] and 3.0 [95% CI, 2.2-4.2], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Stakeholders should allocate greater supportive care resources to HNC survivors. The interdependence of substance abuse, adverse mental health symptoms, and other adverse patient-level influences requires development of novel, multimodal survivorship care interventions.

The Head and Neck Survivorship Tool (HN-STAR) Trial (WF-1805CD): A protocol for a cluster-randomized, hybrid effectiveness-implementation, pragmatic trial to improve the follow-up care of head and neck cancer survivors

Survivors of head and neck cancer (HNC) can have multiple health concerns. To facilitate their care, we developed and pilot-tested a clinical informatics intervention, HN-STAR. HN-STAR elicits concerns online from HNC survivors prior to a routine oncology clinic visit. HN-STAR then presents tailored evidence-based clinical recommendations as a clinical decision support tool to be used during the visit where the oncology clinician and survivor select symptom management strategies and other actions. This generates a survivorship care plan (SCP). Online elicitation of health concerns occurs 3, 6, and 9 months after the clinic visit, generating an updated SCP each time. HN-STAR encompasses important methods of improving survivorship care (e.g., needs assessment, tailored interventions, dissemination of guidelines) and will be evaluated in a pragmatic trial to maximize external validity. This hybrid type 1 implementation-effectiveness trial tests HN-STAR effectiveness while studying barriers and facilitators to implementation in community oncology practices within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program. Effectiveness will be measured as differences in key survivorship outcomes between HNC participants who do and do not use HN-STAR over one year after the clinic visit. The primary endpoint is HNC-specific quality of life; other outcomes include patient-centered measures and receipt of guideline-concordant care. Implementation outcomes will be assessed of survivors, providers, and clinic stakeholders. The hybrid design will provide insight into a dose-response relationship between the extent of implementation fidelity and effectiveness outcomes, as well as how to incorporate HN-STAR into standard practice outside the research setting.

Clinical Decision Support Systems in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery: A State of the Art Review

OBJECTIVE

To offer practical, evidence-informed knowledge on clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) and their utility in improving care and reducing costs in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery. This primer on CDSSs introduces clinicians to both the capabilities and the limitations of this technology, reviews the literature on current state, and seeks to spur further progress in this area.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science.

REVIEW METHODS

Scoping review of CDSS literature applicable to otolaryngology clinical practice. Investigators identified articles that incorporated knowledge-based computerized CDSSs to aid clinicians in decision making and workflow. Data extraction included level of evidence, Osheroff classification of CDSS intervention type, otolaryngology subspecialty or domain, and impact on provider performance or patient outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Of 3191 studies retrieved, 11 articles met formal inclusion criteria. CDSS interventions included guideline or protocols support (n = 8), forms and templates (n = 5), data presentation aids (n = 2), and reactive alerts, reference information, or order sets (all n = 1); 4 studies had multiple interventions. CDSS studies demonstrated effectiveness across diverse domains, including antibiotic stewardship, cancer survivorship, guideline adherence, data capture, cost reduction, and workflow. Implementing CDSSs often involved collaboration with health information technologists.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

While the published literature on CDSSs in otolaryngology is finite, CDSS interventions are proliferating in clinical practice, with roles in preventing medical errors, streamlining workflows, and improving adherence to best practices for head and neck disorders. Clinicians may collaborate with information technologists and health systems scientists to develop, implement, and investigate the impact of CDSSs in otolaryngology.

Identification and management of late dysfunction in survivors of head and neck cancer: Implementation and outcomes of an interdisciplinary quality of life (IQOL) clinic

BACKGROUND

Identifying and treating late dysfunction in survivors of head and neck cancer (HNC) is important; however, an effective way to do so is not established.

METHODS

A quality improvement initiative altering our HNC survivorship clinic to include surveillance by rehabilitation providers was undertaken. The nature of dysfunction identified, along with the number and type of referrals to ancillary/support services were collected and compared to baseline.

RESULTS

The baseline, single-provider, clinic evaluated 61 patients and referred 2 (3%) to ancillary/support services. Fifty-seven patients were evaluated in the interdisciplinary clinic, with 36 (63%) referred to at least one ancillary/support service for new/progressive dysfunction. Of 59 referrals made, 22 (37%) were for dysphagia, 17(29%) were for neck/shoulder dysfunction, and 28 (47%) were attended by the patient.

CONCLUSION

Many HNC survivors exhibit late dysfunction appropriate for referral to ancillary/support services. A survivorship clinic including surveillance by rehabilitation specialists may optimize identification of dysfunction.

Digitalized healthcare for head and neck cancer patients

The ongoing shortage in healthcare services and the increasing cancer incidence, highlight the need for new strategies to ensure optimal treatments, cares and follow-up for all patients. Digitalized healthcare, which includes various concepts (digital health, telemedicine, telemonitoring and digital therapeutics), are a promising option to meet these needs. In this scoping review, we provide an overview of the recent available research evidence on digitalized healthcare for HNC patients and caregivers. Through the interrogation of PubMed and Cochrane Library databases, a total of 32 relevant articles reporting the use of digitalized healthcare in different settings of HNC patients' care management, were analyzed. Overall, HNC patients as well as caregivers were highly satisfied, especially because digitalized healthcare allows the early detection of health disorders, improve patient's management, quality of life, self-confidence and communication. Furthermore, digitalized healthcare were significantly time- and cost-effective. While the benefits digitalized healthcare has been reported to be feasible and clinically relevant, our future efforts should focus on the demonstration of their clinical utility in well-designed clinical trials. It is tempting to anticipate that this approach will improve patients' management and quality of life and change the way patients interact with family and professional health care givers.

Effects of Computerized Decision Support Systems on Practitioner Performance and Patient Outcomes: Systematic Review

Background

Computerized decision support systems (CDSSs) are software programs that support the decision making of practitioners and other staff. Other reviews have analyzed the relationship between CDSSs, practitioner performance, and patient outcomes. These reviews reported positive practitioner performance in over half the articles analyzed, but very little information was found for patient outcomes.

Objective

The purpose of this review was to analyze the relationship between CDSSs, practitioner performance, and patient medical outcomes. PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were queried.

Methods

Articles were chosen based on year published (last 10 years), high quality, peer-reviewed sources, and discussion of the relationship between the use of CDSS as an intervention and links to practitioner performance or patient outcomes. Reviewers used an Excel spreadsheet (Microsoft Corporation) to collect information on the relationship between CDSSs and practitioner performance or patient outcomes. Reviewers also collected observations of participants, intervention, comparison with control group, outcomes, and study design (PICOS) along with those showing implicit bias. Articles were analyzed by multiple reviewers following the Kruse protocol for systematic reviews. Data were organized into multiple tables for analysis and reporting.

Results

Themes were identified for both practitioner performance (n=38) and medical outcomes (n=36). A total of 66% (25/38) of articles had occurrences of positive practitioner performance, 13% (5/38) found no difference in practitioner performance, and 21% (8/38) did not report or discuss practitioner performance. Zero articles reported negative practitioner performance. A total of 61% (22/36) of articles had occurrences of positive patient medical outcomes, 8% (3/36) found no statistically significant difference in medical outcomes between intervention and control groups, and 31% (11/36) did not report or discuss medical outcomes. Zero articles found negative patient medical outcomes attributed to using CDSSs.

Conclusions

Results of this review are commensurate with previous reviews with similar objectives, but unlike these reviews we found a high level of reporting of positive effects on patient medical outcomes.

Clinical Decision Support and Implications for the Clinician Burnout Crisis

OBJECTIVES

This survey aimed to review aspects of clinical decision support (CDS) that contribute to burnout and identify key themes for improving the acceptability of CDS to clinicians, with the goal of decreasing said burnout.

METHODS

We performed a survey of relevant articles from 2018-2019 addressing CDS and aspects of clinician burnout from PubMed and Web of Science™. Themes were manually extracted from publications that met inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine articles met inclusion criteria, including 12 review articles. Review articles were either prescriptive, describing how CDS should work, or analytic, describing how current CDS tools are deployed. The non-review articles largely demonstrated poor relevance and acceptability of current tools, and few studies showed benefits in terms of efficiency or patient outcomes from implemented CDS. Encouragingly, multiple studies highlighted steps that succeeded in improving both acceptability and relevance of CDS.

CONCLUSIONS

CDS can contribute to clinician frustration and burnout. Using the techniques of improving relevance, soliciting feedback, customization, measurement of outcomes and metrics, and iteration, the effects of CDS on burnout can be ameliorated.

Registering Study Analysis Plans (SAPs) Before Dissecting Your Data—Updating and Standardizing Outcome Modeling

Public preregistration of study analysis plans (SAPs) is widely recognized for clinical trials, but adopted to a much lesser extent in observational studies. Registration of SAPs prior to analysis is encouraged to not only increase transparency and exactness but also to avoid positive finding bias and better standardize outcome modeling. Efforts to generally standardize outcome modeling, which can be based on clinical trial and/or observational data, have recently spurred. We suggest a three-step SAP concept in which investigators are encouraged to (1) Design the SAP and circulate it among the co-investigators, (2) Log the SAP with a public repository, which recognizes the SAP with a digital object identifier (DOI), and (3) Cite (using the DOI), briefly summarize and motivate any deviations from the SAP in the associated manuscript. More specifically, the SAP should include the scope (brief data and study description, co-investigators, hypotheses, primary outcome measure, study title), in addition to step-by-step details of the analysis (handling of missing data, resampling, defined significance level, statistical function, validation, and variables and parameterization).