Improving Symptom Communication Through Personal Digital Assistants: The CHAT (Communicating Health Assisted by Technology) Project

Post, Douglas M.; Shapiro, Charles L.; Cegala, Donald J.; David, Prabu; Katz, Mira L.; Krok, Jessica L.; Phillips, Gary; McAlearney, Ann; Lehman, Jennifer; Hicks, William; Paskett, Electra D.

doi:10.1093/jncimonographs/lgt027

Cited by 20 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A pilot RCT of 44 patients reported that patients used a handheld device consistently for an average of 10 weeks [35]. Similar results were reported in another pilot RCT of 60 patients that used a PDA for approximately 22 weeks, where 83% of patients completed symptom inventories and 90% watched communication videos when instructed [43]. For the longest study period included in this review (up to six months), Chumbler and colleagues [30] reported that the mean adherence of 48 patients to daily dialogues with a care coordinator was 84%, with a decrease in adherence as treatment progressed.…”

Section: Adherence To Mobile Interventionssupporting

confidence: 62%

“…In contrast, although one feasibility study reported a non-significant increase in quality of life following a painmonitoring intervention [28], one feasibility study reported no change in wellbeing [39], however both studies had small sample sizes. Negative findings were also reported by Post and colleagues [43] in a pilot RCT study of 60 patients using a PDA device, where patients reported symptoms weekly during treatment periods and viewed videos on how to communicate their symptoms to their clinicians prior to their consultations. This study found that patients' HRQOL were not significantly different between groups.…”

Section: Heath-related Quality Of Life (Hrqol)mentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Almost all patients reported that they found the mobile interventions easy to use, regardless of age, cancer type and experience with technology [28,35,36,38,39,40,43,[45][46][47]. For example, Head and colleagues [35] reported that all 44 patients from the intervention arm of an RCT reported a handheld device to be very easy (85%) or easy (15%) to use.…”

Section: Perceived Ease Of Usementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies generally reported high adherence rates to the mobile interventions, regardless of the length of the study [28,30,31,35,43,44,45,[47][48][49]. A pilot RCT of 44 patients reported that patients used a handheld device consistently for an average of 10 weeks [35].…”

Section: Adherence To Mobile Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yap and colleagues [49] reported that adherence was significantly higher among Smartphone users compared to basic mobile phones users (87.2% vs 47.6%). The most common reasons reported for non-adherence to interventions were hospitalisation, forgetfulness and technical problems [35,43].…”

Section: Adherence To Mobile Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Use of Mobile Devices to Help Cancer Patients Meet Their Information Needs in Non-Inpatient Settings: Systematic Review (Preprint)

Richards¹,

Kinnersley²,

Brain³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of mobile devices to help patients with cancer to meet their information needs in non-inpatient settings: A systematic review IntroductionIt is estimated that one in two people in Great Britain will develop some form of cancer during their lifetime [1]. In 2014, 357,000 new cases of cancer were diagnosed in the UK and the rate of incidence is increasing [2]. However, survival rates have doubled in the UK in the last 40 years and so, for many, cancer is a chronic condition with which they live for many years. Subsequently, there has been a shift from inpatient to outpatient and community cancer care, where patients are required to manage their condition at home, away from regular supervision by clinicians. This change in care requires patients to take a more active role in their treatment and survivorship. Patients are often faced with an uncertain future, unfamiliar tests and procedures, complex decisions about treatment options, treatment-related side-effects and lifestyle changes. In order to take a more active role in their care, and to cope with and manage these changes to daily life, patients require relevant information [3,4]. Research has established that patients have a wide range of information needs throughout their illness. Reviews of these studies suggest that patients generally want information on the extent of the disease, likelihood of cure and prognosis, available treatments, side-effects of treatment, self-care and return to normal life [5][6][7]. Other, less urgent, information needs include the impact of cancer and/or treatment on social activities, family and friends, mental wellbeing and sexual activity, and the risk of family and friends getting cancer [5,6]. There is evidence to suggest that information may help to reduce uncertainty, provide patients with a sense of control over their lives and support informed decision-making about treatment options [8,9]. While many people with cancer want as much information as possible about their condition [10], up to 93% of cancer patients across the US, Europe and the UK report having unmet information needs [11][12][13][14].The introduction of Smart technology has provided a new platform for delivering information-based interventions to patients. Approximately 93% of adults in the UK now personally own or use a mobile phone, of whom 71% specify that they own a Smartphone [15]. Similarly, over two thirds of adults in the UK now own or have access to a tablet computer [15]. Similar statistics of Smart device ownership and use have been reported in cancer patient populations [16,17]. Mobile devices therefore offer the potential for wide reach at the point of need for patients with cancer. Several existing systematic and scoping reviews have explored the general use of mobile devices for patients with cancer [18][19][20][21][22][23]. Findings from these reviews show that mobile interventions have been developed for a range of purposes, including the prevention, detection, and management of cancer; however, most interventions have been designed...

show abstract

Section: Adherence To Mobile Interventionssupporting

confidence: 62%

Section: Heath-related Quality Of Life (Hrqol)mentioning

confidence: 77%