Acceptance of physical activity monitoring in cancer patients during radiotherapy, the GIROfit phase 2 pilot trial

Boeke, Simon; Hauth, Franziska; Fischer, S.; Lautenbacher, Heinrich; Bizu, Verena; Zips, Daniel; Gani, Cihan

doi:10.1016/j.tipsro.2022.03.004

Cited by 3 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2018 [ 29 ] Multipurpose tool: appointment calendar, medication tracker, symptom tracker durin (Health Storylines) Single arm 32 Adult patients receiving RT Usable and acceptable, more customization is needed to increase usability No Boeke et al. 2022 [ 23 ] Activity tracker during RT and 4 weeks afterwards (GIROfit) Single arm 23 Patients receiving RT/RCT (curative) High acceptance. Observed changes in physical activities correlated with patient-reported side effects and QoL in some patients No Da Cruz et al.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three apps supplied an activity tracker [ 12 , 23 , 24 ]. Two reminder apps for head and neck cancer patients were found, one with the goal of completing skin care four times a day [ 13 ] and one to support adherence to swallowing therapy during RT [ 25 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As described in Tables 1 and 2 in detail, most patient-centered studies were single-arm studies or descriptive in nature. Overall, those studies showed high compliance [ 20 , 31 , 32 ], high acceptance [ 22 , 23 , 29 , 33 – 37 ], effectiveness [ 28 ], satisfaction [ 31 ], usability [ 29 , 38 , 39 ], simplicity [ 38 ], and feasibility [ 12 , 25 , 32 , 35 – 37 , 39 ]. The randomized two-arm studies analyzing the impact of an app on the standard of care showed a significant reduction in adverse effects in head and neck cancer patients [ 13 , 15 , 17 ] and prostate cancer patients undergoing RT [ 19 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mobile applications in radiation oncology—current choices and future potentials

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To review existing scientific literature on mobile applications (apps) in the field of radiation oncology and to evaluate characteristics of commercially available apps across different platforms. Methods A systematic review of the literature for publications presenting apps in the field of radiation oncology was carried out using the PubMed database, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, and annual meetings of major radiation oncology societies. Additionally, the two major marketplaces for apps, App Store and Play Store, were searched for available radiation oncology apps for patients and health care professionals (HCP). Results A total of 38 original publications which met the inclusion criteria were identified. Within those publications, 32 apps were developed for patients and 6 for HCP. The vast majority of patient apps focused on documenting electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs). In the two major marketplaces, 26 apps were found, mainly supporting HCP with dose calculations. Conclusion Apps used in (and for) scientific research in radiation oncology are rarely available for patients and HCP in common marketplaces.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mobile applications in radiation oncology—current choices and future potentials

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Table 1 , The advantages of ePRO were found to be diverse, with “Improved Quality of Life and Care” being the most prominent, cited in 45 studies (28.48%). 14 – 16 , 18 , 31 – 71 This was followed by “Real-time and Remote Monitoring” with 39 references (24.68%), highlighting its significance in real-time health monitoring, which can significantly impact patient outcomes 1 , 16 – 18 , 31 , 33 , 34 , 36 – 39 , 43 , 44 , 47 , 49 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most prevalent disadvantage was “Small sample size,” cited in 19 studies (15.70%), reflecting a common challenge in research methodologies that may limit the generalizability of findings, 1 , 17 , 33 , 34 , 38 , 47 , 54 , 56 , 58 , 63 , 65 , 70 , 72 , 74 , 83 , 85 , 87 , 90 , 91 followed by “Technical issues” with 16 references (13.22%), highlighting the challenges posed by technology in the implementation of electronic health platforms 18 , 19 , 24 , 34 , 39 , 47 , 50 , 60 , 66 – 68 , 74 , 76 , 81 , 92 , 93 and “Potential bias” with 12 references (9.92%), emphasizing the need for researchers to address and mitigate bias in participant selection, data extraction and reporting. 16 , 22 , 40 , 41 , 43 , 57 , 65 , 74 , 84 , 85 , 94 , …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The advantages, disadvantages, threats, and opportunities of electronic patient-reported outcome systems in cancer: A systematic review

Salmani,

Nasiri,

Ahmadi

2024

DIGITAL HEALTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems hold promise for revolutionizing communication between cancer patients and healthcare providers across various care settings. This systematic review explores the multifaceted landscape of ePROs in cancer care, encompassing their advantages, disadvantages, potential risks, and opportunities for improvement. Methods In our systematic review, we conducted a rigorous search in Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed, employing comprehensive medical subject heading terms for ePRO and cancer, with no date limitations up to 2024. Studies were critically appraised and thematically analyzed based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, including considerations of advantages, disadvantages, opportunities, and threats. Findings Analyzing 85 articles revealed 69 themes categorized into four key areas. Advantages ( n = 14) were dominated by themes like “improved quality of life and care.” Disadvantages ( n = 26) included “limited access and technical issues.” Security concerns and lack of technical skills were prominent threats ( n = 10). Opportunities ( n = 19) highlighted advancements in symptom management and potential solutions for technical challenges. Conclusion This review emphasizes the crucial role of continuous exploration, integration, and innovation in ePRO systems for optimizing patient outcomes in cancer care. Beyond traditional clinical settings, ePROs hold promise for applications in survivorship, palliative care, and remote monitoring. By addressing existing limitations and capitalizing on opportunities, ePROs can empower patients, enhance communication, and ultimately improve care delivery across the entire cancer care spectrum.

show abstract

Advancing patient-centered cancer care: a systematic review of electronic patient-reported outcome measures

Salmani,

Nasiri,

Alemrajabi

et al. 2024

Front. Rehabil. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundElectronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (ePROMs) have emerged as valuable tools in cancer care, facilitating the comprehensive assessment of patients’ physical, psychological, and social well-being. This study synthesizes literature on the utilization of ePROMs in oncology, highlighting the diverse array of measurement instruments and questionnaires employed in cancer patient assessments. By comprehensively analyzing existing research, this study provides insights into the landscape of ePROMs, informs future research directions, and aims to optimize patient-centred oncology care through the strategic integration of ePROMs into clinical practice.MethodsA systematic review was conducted by searching peer-reviewed articles published in academic journals without time limitations up to 2024. The search was performed across multiple electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, using predefined search terms related to cancer, measurement instruments, and patient assessment. The selected articles underwent a rigorous quality assessment using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).ResultsThe review of 85 studies revealed a diverse range of measurement instruments and questionnaires utilized in cancer patient assessments. Prominent instruments such as the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Patient Reported Outcome-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) were frequently referenced across multiple studies. Additionally, other instruments identified included generic health-related quality of life measures and disease-specific assessments tailored to particular cancer types. The findings indicated the importance of utilizing a variety of measurement tools to comprehensively assess the multifaceted needs and experiences of cancer patients.ConclusionOur systematic review provides a comprehensive examination of the varied tools and ePROMs employed in cancer care, accentuating the perpetual requirement for development and validation. Prominent instruments like the EORTC QLQ-C30 and PRO-CTCAE are underscored, emphasizing the necessity for a thorough assessment to meet the multifaceted needs of patients. Looking ahead, scholarly endeavours should prioritize the enhancement of existing tools and the creation of novel measures to adeptly address the evolving demands of cancer patients across heterogeneous settings and populations.

show abstract

Acceptance of physical activity monitoring in cancer patients during radiotherapy, the GIROfit phase 2 pilot trial

Cited by 3 publications

References 20 publications

Mobile applications in radiation oncology—current choices and future potentials

Mobile applications in radiation oncology—current choices and future potentials

The advantages, disadvantages, threats, and opportunities of electronic patient-reported outcome systems in cancer: A systematic review

Advancing patient-centered cancer care: a systematic review of electronic patient-reported outcome measures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About