Evaluation and Implementation of ListeningTime: A Web-Based Preparatory Communication Tool for Elderly Patients With Cancer and Their Health Care Providers

Better use of inhaled medication in asthma and COPD through training, preparation and counselling: the On TRACk study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

About 70% of patients with asthma and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) use their inhaled medication incorrectly, leading to reduced disease control, higher healthcare use and costs. Adequate guidance from the pharmacy team from first dispense onwards can benefit patients in the long run. We propose an intervention ('On TRACk') to improve medication adherence and inhaler technique of adult patients with asthma and/or COPD. This intervention focuses on training pharmacy technicians (PTs) in patient-centred communication and inhalation instruction skills. In addition, patients are actively involved in refill consultations at the pharmacy. The aim of this study is to improve inhaler technique and better inhaled medication adherence among patients with asthma and/or COPD. This paper describes the study protocol.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) with an intervention and control group of 15 pharmacies each will be conducted. Per intervention pharmacy, two PTs will be trained online. Each PT will include five patients who will prepare their second and third dispense counselling sessions by selecting three topics they wish to discuss. Pharmacies in the control cluster provide usual care. In total, 300 patients (150 per group) will be included. Up to 12 months after inclusion, patients complete 3-monthly follow-up questionnaires. Both a process evaluation and a cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed alongside the trial. Trial effectiveness on the patient level will be evaluated after the 12-month follow-up period.Patient data will be collected through questionnaires and pharmacy refill data. Patients' inhaler technique will be visually assessed by PTs. Semistructured interviews with PTs and patients will be conducted regarding implementation and fidelity. Direct and indirect health costs will be collected to assess cost-effectiveness.The primary outcome is adherence to inhalation maintenance medication measured with pharmacy refill data. Secondary outcomes are inhaler technique, persistence, patients' attitudes towards medication, self-efficacy in medication use and communication with their PTs.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Ethics Committee (number: 2020.358). Results will be presented at (inter)national conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. If proven to be (cost-)effective, the intervention should be considered for reimbursement and implementation in Dutch community pharmacies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NL9750.

eHealth Interventions for Dutch Cancer Care: Systematic Review Using the Triple Aim Lens

BACKGROUND

Globally, the burden of cancer on population health is growing. Recent trends such as increasing survival rates have resulted in a need to adapt cancer care to ensure a good care experience and manageable expenditures. eHealth is a promising way to increase the quality of cancer care and support patients and survivors.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was 2-fold. First, we aimed to provide an overview of eHealth interventions and their characteristics for Dutch patients with and survivors of cancer. Second, we aimed to provide an overview of the empirical evidence regarding the impact of eHealth interventions in cancer care on population health, quality of care, and per capita costs (the Triple Aim domains).

METHODS

The electronic databases Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane, and Ovid PsycINFO were searched using 3 key search themes: eHealth interventions, cancer care, and the Netherlands. The identified interventions were classified according to predetermined criteria describing the intervention characteristics (eg, type, function, and target population). Their impact was subsequently examined using the Triple Aim framework.

RESULTS

A total of 38 interventions were identified. Most of these were web portals or web applications functioning to inform and self-manage, and target psychosocial factors or problems. Few interventions have been tailored to age, disease severity, or gender. The results of this study indicate that eHealth interventions could positively affect sleep quality, fatigue, and physical activity of patients with and survivors of cancer. Inconclusive results were found regarding daily functioning and quality of life, psychological complaints, and psychological adjustment to the disease.

CONCLUSIONS

eHealth can improve outcomes in the Triple Aim domains, particularly in the population health and quality of care domains. Cancer-related pain and common symptoms of active treatment were not targeted in the included interventions and should receive more attention. Further research is needed to fully understand the impact of eHealth interventions in cancer care on participation, accessibility, and costs. The latter can be examined in economic evaluations by comparing eHealth interventions with care as usual.

Methods for Human-Centered eHealth Development: Narrative Scoping Review

Background

Thorough holistic development of eHealth can contribute to a good fit among the technology, its users, and the context. However, despite the availability of frameworks, not much is known about specific research activities for different aims, phases, and settings. This results in researchers having to reinvent the wheel. Consequently, there is a need to synthesize existing knowledge on research activities for participatory eHealth development processes.

Objective

The 3 main goals of this review are to create an overview of the development strategies used in studies based on the CeHRes (Center for eHealth Research) Roadmap, create an overview of the goals for which these methods can be used, and provide insight into the lessons learned about these methods.

Methods

We included eHealth development studies that were based on the phases and/or principles of the CeHRes Roadmap. This framework was selected because of its focus on participatory, iterative eHealth design in context and to limit the scope of this review. Data were extracted about the type of strategy used, rationale for using the strategy, research questions, and reported information on lessons learned. The most frequently mentioned lessons learned were summarized using a narrative, inductive approach.

Results

In the included 160 papers, a distinction was made between overarching development methods (n=10) and products (n=7). Methods are used to gather new data, whereas products can be used to synthesize previously collected data and support the collection of new data. The identified methods were focus groups, interviews, questionnaires, usability tests, literature studies, desk research, log data analyses, card sorting, Delphi studies, and experience sampling. The identified products were prototypes, requirements, stakeholder maps, values, behavior change strategies, personas, and business models. Examples of how these methods and products were applied in the development process and information about lessons learned were provided.

Conclusions

This study shows that there is a plethora of methods and products that can be used at different points in the development process and in different settings. To do justice to the complexity of eHealth development, it seems that multiple strategies should be combined. In addition, we found no evidence for an optimal single step-by-step approach to develop eHealth. Rather, researchers need to select the most suitable research methods for their research objectives, the context in which data are collected, and the characteristics of the participants. This study serves as a first step toward creating a toolkit to support researchers in applying the CeHRes Roadmap to practice. In this way, they can shape the most suitable and efficient eHealth development process.

Cancer as a Chronic Illness in Colombia: A Normative Consensus Approach to Improving Healthcare Services for those Living with and beyond Cancer and Its Treatment

Cancer survivorship care in Colombia is of increasing importance. International survivorship initiatives and studies show that continuing symptoms, psychological distress, and late effects impact the quality of life for survivors. Priorities for quality survivorship according to Colombian patients and clinicians are unknown. We undertook a nominal consensus approach with 24 participants using virtual meeting technology to identify the priorities for cancer survivorship. We applied an iterative approach conducted over eight weeks with five workshops and one patient focus group followed by a priority setting survey. The consensus group established six main themes, which were subsequently evaluated by experts: (i) symptoms and secondary effects of cancer; (ii) care coordination to increase patient access and integration of cancer care; (iii) psychosocial support after cancer treatment; (iv) mapping information resources and available support services for long-term cancer care; (v) identifying socioeconomic and regional inequalities in cancer survival to improve care and outcomes; and (vi) health promotion and encouraging lifestyle change. The order of priorities differed between clinicians and patients: patients mentioned psychosocial support as the number one priority, and clinicians prioritized symptoms and surveillance for cancer recurrence. Developing survivorship care needs consideration of both views, including barriers such as access to services and socioeconomic disparities.

How technology impacts communication between cancer patients and their health care providers: A systematic literature review

OBJECTIVE

To ensure the well-being of their patients, health care providers (HCPs) are putting more effort into the quality of the communication they provide in oncology clinics. With the emergence of Health Information Technology (HIT), the dynamics between doctors and patients in oncology settings have changed. The purpose of this literature review is to explore and demonstrate how various health information technologies impact doctor-patient communication in oncology settings.

METHOD

A systematic literature review was conducted in 4 databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore) to select publications that are in English, published between January 2009 and September 2020. This review reports outcomes related to the impacts of using health information technologies on doctor-patient communication according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines (PRISMA).

RESULTS

We identified 31 studies which satisfied the selection and eligibility criteria. The review revealed a diverse range of HIT used to support communication between cancer patients and their HCPs in oncology settings. Outcomes related to communication were examined to demonstrate how technology can improve access to care in clinical settings and online. When technology is used effectively to support patient knowledge and shared understanding, this increases the patient's satisfaction and ability to manage emotions, make decisions, and progress in their treatment, in addition to increasing social support and building a stronger therapeutic alliance based on shared knowledge and transparency between clinicians and patients.

CONCLUSION

Technology-based solutions can help strengthen the relationship and communication between patients and their doctors. They can empower the patient's well-being, help doctors make better decisions and enhance the therapeutic alliance between them. Thus, using technology to enhance communication in healthcare settings remains beneficial if its use is structured and target oriented. Future studies should focus on comparing in-depth the difference between outpatient and inpatient settings in terms of the efforts required and the extent of the impacts from both clinicians' and cancer patients' perspectives.

A Comparative Analysis of Online Medical Record Utilization and Perception by Cancer Survivorship

BACKGROUND

Cancer survivors face many challenges including coordinating care across multiple providers and maintaining medical records from multiple institutions. Access and utilization of online medical records could help cancer survivors manage this complexity. Here, we examined how cancer survivors differ from those without a history of cancer with regards to utilization and perception of medical records.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of 3491 respondents, from the Health Information National Trends survey 5, cycle 2. The association of medical record utilization and perceptions with cancer survivorship was assessed using survey-weighted logistic regression.

RESULTS

Cancer survivors (n=593) were more likely to report that a provider maintains a computerized medical record [adjusted odds ratio (AOR)=2.05; 95% confidence (CI), 1.24-3.41] and were more likely to report confidence in medical record safeguards (AOR=1.44; 95% CI, 1.03-2.03). However, cancer survivors were no more likely to access online medical records than those without a history of cancer (AOR=1.13; 95% CI, 0.69-1.86). Cancer survivors were no more likely to report privacy concerns as a reason for not accessing online medical records, however, survivors were more likely to report a preference for speaking directly with a provider as a reason for not accessing online medical records (AOR=2.24; 95% CI, 0.99-5.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although cancer survivors are more likely to trust medical record safe guards and do not express increased concerns about online medical record privacy, a preference to speak directly with provider is a barrier of use.

A Digital Substance-Use Harm Reduction Intervention for Students in Higher Education (MyUSE): Protocol for Project Development

BACKGROUND

Digital interventions have been identified as a possible tool for reducing the harm caused by illicit drug use among students attending higher education (ie, college students). However, the success of interventions in this area has been hampered by a lack of user involvement and behavior change theory in their design. The My Understanding of Substance use Experiences (MyUSE) project combines a rigorous user-centered design (UCD) methodology and a robust behavioral change framework to develop a digitally delivered harm reduction intervention for illicit drug use among students in higher education.

OBJECTIVE

This project aims to design and develop a digital intervention that targets drug use-related harm among students in higher education.

METHODS

The MyUSE project will take place over 3 phases. The first phase was exploratory in nature, involving 3 systematic reviews, a large survey, and student workshops to gather a comprehensive evidence base to guide the project. The second phase is the development stage of the project, involving the use of the Behavior Change Wheel theoretical framework to determine the behavior change techniques of the intervention and the use of the UCD methodology to guide the development of the digital intervention. The third phase is the evaluation stage, whereby the intervention will undergo a 5-stage evaluation process to comprehensively evaluate its impacts.

RESULTS

The exploratory phase 1 of the MyUSE project was completed in December 2018. Phase 2 is currently underway, and phase 3 is due to begin in September 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher education institutions (HEIs) are ideally placed to intervene and support students in the area of illicit drug use but are constrained by limited resources. Current digital interventions in this area are sparse and have several weaknesses. The MyUSE project combines a UCD approach with a robust behavior change framework to develop a digitally delivered intervention that is economically viable, effective in changing behavior, usable and acceptable to students, and able to sustain long-term implementation in HEIs.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/17829.

Comparing cancer survivors in population-based samples with those in online cancer communities: Identifying differences in internet use and information needs (Preprint)

Background

Most Western countries have websites that provide information on cancer and the opportunity to participate in online cancer communities (OCCs). The number of patients with cancer that participate in these OCCs is growing. These patients are relatively easy to approach for research purposes.

Objective

The objective of this study is to determine the differences and similarities between survivors of cancer in population-based samples and survivors participating in OCCs who use the internet in relation to their illness.

Methods

In 2017, we drew a sample of 539 population-based patients and 531 OCC patients. The population-based patients were sent a paper-based questionnaire, and the OCC patients were sent the same questionnaire on the web. In the questionnaire, we asked patients about their sociodemographics, internet use, sources of information, media use, and wishes regarding future internet use for health care–related purposes, and the effect of internet use on their health care consumption.

Results

The response rate of population-based internet users was 47% (233/496), and that of the OCC group was 40.3% (214/531). The OCC group had a significantly higher education level (P<.001), was younger (P<.001), had more survivors that were employed (P<.001), and attached greater importance to the internet (171/214, 79.9% vs 126/233, 54.1%; P<.001) and fellow survivors (107/214, 50% vs 60/233, 25.8%; P<.001). Compared with the population-based group, the OCC group reported more intensive internet use immediately after diagnosis, during treatment, and during follow-up (P<.001 in each case). There were similarities in terms of the relative importance that survivors attach to the various sources of information, the topics on which they seek information, and their wishes for future eHealth possibilities. The OCC group reported a greater need to participate in a web-based class or chat with others (92/214, 43% vs 44/233, 18.9%).

Conclusions

We conclude that survivors who are members of an OCC are not representative of survivors of cancer in general. There are significant differences in sociodemographic characteristics, internet use during their treatment journey, internet search frequency during their cancer journey, and participation wishes. Using web-based information and communication can support shared decision-making and may facilitate the active participation of patients during their treatment. For research purposes, it is important to take the bias in OCC groups into account.