A Digital Self-management Program (Help to Overcome Problems Effectively) for People Living With Cancer: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial

Impact of digital interventions and online health communities in patient activation: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Study the efficacy of digital health interventions in enhancing patient activation and identify the distinct features of these interventions using the WHO classification system.

METHODS

Asystematic reviewand meta-analysis were carried out according to the PRISMA guidelines. A search was conducted in Scopus, PubMed, and ProQuest. Randomized controlled trials (RCT), quasi-randomized controlled trials, and before-and-after studies enrolling patients ≥ 18 years of age with the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) score measurement and contain digital intervention with any aspects of health education or health-related behavior were included. The Downs and Black quality assessment tool was used to assess the quality of the articles.

RESULTS

In the three different types of meta-analyses, implementing the intervention led to a PAM score increase (Mean Difference (M.D.)), ranging from a minimum of (MD = 0.2014, 95 % CI = 0.0871-0.3158) and a highly significant p-value 0.0006 to a maximum of (MD = 2.7882, 95 % CI = 1.5558-4.0206) and a p-value < .0001. While the M.D. score of 0.2014 may seem relatively low, it is enough to elevate the patient from one activation level to a higher one out of the four activation levels.

CONCLUSION AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The results suggest the effectiveness of digital health interventions on patient activation across diverse settings and contexts, implying potential generalizability. Using WHO classification, all examined digital interventions addressed the challenges of information, utilization, and efficiency in the health system, but not equity-related challenges. The study recognized online health communities (OHCs) as a subset of digital interventions that enhance patient activation through social support.

Feasibility and Acceptability Evaluation of a Digital Therapeutic Program for Improving Cancer Prevention: A Quasi-experimental Pre-post Interventional Pilot Study

Previous studies have proved that healthy behaviors hinder the onset and progression of tumors. Digital therapeutics (DTx), playing a pivotal role in facilitating behavioral adjustments through educational interventions, lifestyle support, and symptom monitoring, contribute to the goal of tumor prevention. We aim to optimize the evaluation of the feasibility and acceptability of DTx for cancer prevention. This involves assessing AITI's daily activity rates and user feedback, and comparing changes in behavioral habits and differences in SF-36 before and after the intervention. In a 4-week trial with 57 participants engaging actively, we found both the average daily activity rate and 4-week retention rate at 35 (61.4%). The USE Questionnaire scores (validity, ease of use, acquisition, and satisfaction) ranged from 68.06 to 83.10, indicating AITI's user-friendliness and acceptability. Furthermore, positive habit changes were noted among participants in exercise and diet (p < 0.0001), suggesting the effectiveness of the DTx approach in modifying behavioral habits related to physical activity and nutrition. This pilot study underscores the potential of DTx in advancing cancer prevention. However, larger and longer studies are needed to comprehensively assess its impact.

Interactive digital tools to support empowerment of people with cancer: a systematic literature review

PURPOSE

To identify and synthesise interactive digital tools used to support the empowerment of people with cancer and the outcomes of these tools.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane, Eric, Scopus, and PsycINFO databases in May 2023. Inclusion criteria were patient empowerment as an outcome supported by interactive digital tools expressed in study goal, methods or results, peer-reviewed studies published since 2010 in cancer care. Narrative synthesis was applied, and the quality of the studies was assessed following Joanna Briggs Institute checklists.

RESULTS

Out of 1571 records screened, 39 studies published in 2011-2022 with RCT (17), single-arm trial (15), quasi-experimental (1), and qualitative designs (6) were included. A total of 30 interactive digital tools were identified to support empowerment (4) and related aspects, such as self-management (2), coping (4), patient activation (9), and self-efficacy (19). Significant positive effects were found on empowerment (1), self-management (1), coping (1), patient activation (2), and self-efficacy (10). Patient experiences were positive. Interactivity occurred with the tool itself (22), peers (7), or nurses (7), physicians (2), psychologists, (2) or social workers (1).

CONCLUSION

Interactive digital tools have been developed extensively in recent years, varying in terms of content and methodology, favouring feasibility and pilot designs. In all of the tools, people with cancer are either active or recipients of information. The research evidence indicates positive outcomes for patient empowerment through interactive digital tools. Thus, even though promising, there still is need for further testing of the tools.

Social media-based interventions for patients with cancer: a meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomised controlled trials

PURPOSE

This review aimed to (1) evaluate the effectiveness of social media-based interventions for improving the quality of life, anxiety and depressive symptoms of patients with cancer at post-intervention and follow-up; (2) identify the essential features of social media-based interventions and (3) explore the covariates of the treatment effect.

METHODS

All types of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Ten electronic databases, clinical trial registries and grey literature sources were searched from inception to 15 December 2021. Stata software was used to perform meta-analysis, subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses. Individual quality assessment and certainty of evidence were assessed using Cochrane risk of bias tool version 1 and Grading of Recommendations Assessments, Development and Evaluation criteria, respectively.

RESULTS

This review included 43 RCTs, which comprised 6239 patients with a total mean age of 49.71 years old from across 11 countries. Social media-based interventions significantly improved the quality of life (g = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.05-0.45) and anxiety symptoms (g =  - 0.41, 95% CI =  - 0.76-0.07) but not depressive symptoms. The essential features based on the subgroup analysis concluded that using a mobile device with a flexible frequency had a remarkably greater effect on the quality of life and anxiety symptoms than their counterparts. The meta-regression showed the covariate features, where having more social media features in interventions significantly improved the quality of life (β = 0.21, p = 0.01). The certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants who received social media-based interventions may experience an increase in quality of life and reduction in anxiety symptoms.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Social media-based interventions may complement usual care in improving quality of life and anxiety symptoms. Registration in PROSPERO CRD42022297956.

The role of digital health in supporting cancer patients' mental health and psychological well-being for a better quality of life: A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

This work aims to evaluate the role of digital health in supporting the mental and psychological well-being of patients with cancer and identify the associated challenges of use and implementation.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria: We included peer-reviewed studies (quantitative/qualitative) published between January 2011 and July 2022, that are written in English using technology to support cancer patients' mental health. We excluded opinion papers, editorials, and commentaries.

INFORMATION SOURCES

The systematic review was conducted across ProQuest CENTRAL, Scopus, PubMed, PsycInfo, Web Of Science, and IEEE Xplore. The study selection followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews, meta-Analysis Reviews, and meta-Analysis guidelines (PRISMA). Risk of bias: All screening steps followed a consensus between the authors to minimize bias or discrepancy. Synthesis of the results: Data were extracted following the Six-factor Model of Psychological Well-being (SMPW). The technology challenges are summarized following the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model (SEIPS), focusing on design, impact on processes, and outcomes.

RESULTS

We included 25 studies satisfying our inclusion criteria. The studies had little interest in minorities and sociodemographic factors' assessment within their results. The review showed that mental health and psychological well-being tools cover many applications. In addition to allowing personal growth, digital health can help cancer patients gain more autonomy and self-acceptance. Moreover, these health technologies can aid in mastering the environment, shaping social relationships, and pursuing life goals. Many challenges were identified related to the environment, organization, users, and tasks.

DISCUSSION

Digital health applications for cancer care cover a broad spectrum of mental health interventions. Challenges warrant analyzing the needs and usability. Lessons learned during COVID-19 may help refine technology interventions for mental health in cancer care. More interest in minorities is needed when designing technologies for patients to ensure more access to equitable care.

What Works to Improve Wellbeing? A Rapid Systematic Review of 223 Interventions Evaluated with the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scales

INTRODUCTION

The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS) is a commonly used scale of mental wellbeing focusing entirely on the positive aspect of mental health. It has been widely used in a broad range of clinical and research settings, including to evaluate if interventions, programmes or pilots improve wellbeing. We aimed to systematically review all interventions that used WEMWBS and evaluate which interventions are the most effective at improving wellbeing.

METHODS

Eligible populations included children and adults, with no health or age restrictions. Any intervention study was eligible if the wellbeing outcome was measured using the 7 or 14-item WEMWBS scale assessed both pre- and post-intervention. We identified eligible intervention studies using three approaches: a database search (Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PyschInfo and Web of Science from January 2007 to present), grey literature search, and by issuing a call for evidence. Narrative synthesis and random-effects meta-analysis of standardised mean differences in the intervention group were used to summarise intervention effects on WEMWBS score.

RESULTS

We identified 223 interventions across 209 studies, with a total of 53,834 participants across all studies. Five main themes of interventions were synthesised: psychological (n = 80); social (n = 54); arts, culture and environment (n = 29); physical health promotion (n = 18); and other (n = 28). Psychological interventions based on resilience, wellbeing or self-management techniques had the strongest effect on wellbeing. A broad range of other interventions were effective at improving mental wellbeing, including other psychological interventions such as cognitive behavioural therapy, psychoeducation and mindfulness. Medium to strong effects were also seen for person-centred support/advice (social), arts-based, parenting (social) and social prescribing interventions. However, a major limitation of the evidence was that only 75 (36%) of studies included a control group.

CONCLUSIONS

WEMWBS has been widely used to assess wellbeing across a diverse range of interventions, settings and samples. Despite substantial heterogeneity in individual intervention design, delivery and groups targeted, results indicate that a broad range of intervention types can successfully improve wellbeing. Methodological changes, such as greater use of control groups in intervention evaluation, can help future researchers and policy makers further understand what works for mental wellbeing.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of web-based psychosocial interventions among patients with colorectal cancer

AIMS

To synthesize the effectiveness of web-based psychosocial interventions on self-efficacy, anxiety, depression, quality of life (QoL), non-specific psychological and cancer-specific distress among patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Six databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and CNKI) were searched from inception to December 2021.

REVIEW METHODS

Experimental/quasi-experimental studies involving patients with CRC for the improvement of aforementioned outcomes were included. Two reviewers screened and extracted the data, and assessed studies' methodological quality using risk of bias tools. Meta-analyses and narrative syntheses were performed.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies consisting of 1386 participants were identified. Cognitive-behavioural therapy delivered online was the most common trialled web-based psychosocial intervention. Meta-analyses revealed no positive effect for self-efficacy (standardized mean difference 0.93, 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.35, p < .01) and minimal benefit for QoL (mean difference [MD] 2.83, 95% CI: -0.31 to 5.98, p = .08) but significant positive effects for anxiety (MD -2.23, 95% CI: -3.31 to -1.14, p < .01) and depression (MD -2.84, 95% CI: -4.09 to -1.59, p < .01) among CRC survivors in the intervention group as compared with the control group. Narrative synthesis suggested possible benefits in reducing distress.

CONCLUSION

Web-based psychosocial interventions are promising alternatives to conventional delivery methods in reducing patients' anxiety, depression and distress. However, evidence on self-efficacy and QoL remains inconsistent. More adequately powered, well-designed trials with targeted and theory-based interventions are required to ascertain findings.

IMPACT

By highlighting the potential of web-based psychosocial interventions in reducing anxiety and depression among CRC survivors, this review has put forth beneficial information supporting the use and acceptance of web-based care delivery in light of COVID-19 restrictions and nationwide lockdowns. Meanwhile, the paucity of empirical support reflects the necessity of more extensive research to test and improve other health outcomes. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021261396.

Feasibility of a Digital Therapeutic Program for Cancer Patients During Active Treatment: Analysis of Engagement, Retention and Quality of Life (Preprint)

Background

Increasing evidence shows that lifestyle interventions can improve the symptoms, quality of life (QoL), and even overall survival of patients with cancer. Digital therapeutics (DTx) can help implement behavioral modifications and empower patients through education, lifestyle support, and remote symptom monitoring.

Objective

We aimed to test the feasibility of a DTx program for patients with cancer, as measured by engagement, retention, and acceptability. In addition, we explored the effects of the program on cancer-related QoL.

Methods

We conducted a 4-week single-arm trial in Iceland, where DTx was delivered through a smartphone app. The intervention consisted of patient education about mindfulness, sleep, stress, and nutrition; lifestyle coaching; and the completion of daily missions for tracking physical activity and exercise, reporting patient-reported outcomes (PROs), practicing mindfulness, and logging healthy food intake. Information on program engagement and retention, step goal attainment, as well as PROs were collected throughout the study. QoL was measured using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 at baseline and follow-up.

Results

In total, 30 patients with cancer undergoing active therapy were enrolled, and 29 registered in the app (23 female, 18 with breast cancer; mean age 52.6, SD 11.5 years). Overall, 97% (28/29) of participants were active in 3 of the 4 weeks and completed the pre- and postprogram questionnaires. The weekly active days (median) were 6.8 (IQR 5.8-6.8), and 72% (21/29) of participants were active at least 5 days a week. Users interacted with the app on average 7.7 (SD 1.9) times per day. On week 1, all 29 participants used the step counter and logged an average of 20,306 steps; 21 (72%) participants reached their step goals of at least 3000 steps per day. On week 4, of the 28 active users, 27 (96%) were still logging their steps, with 19 (68%) reaching their step goals. Of the 28 participants who completed the satisfaction questionnaire, 25 (89%) were likely to recommend the program, 23 (82%) said the program helped them deal with the disease, and 24 (86%) said it helped them remember their medication. QoL assessment showed that the average global health status, functioning, and symptom burden remained stable from baseline to follow-up. In all, 50% (14/28) of participants reported less pain, and the average pain score decreased from 31 (SD 20.1) to 22.6 (SD 23.2; P=.16). There was no significant change in PROs on the quality of sleep, energy, and stress levels from the first to the last week.

Conclusions

The high retention, engagement, and acceptability found in this study demonstrate that multidisciplinary DTx is feasible for patients with cancer. A longer, full-scale randomized controlled trial is currently being planned to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention.