Availability and use of web-based interventions for patients with head and neck cancer: a scoping review

Abstract

Purpose To identify and review the nature, scope and use of web-based interventions for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). Method A scoping review guided by the methodological framework described by the Joanna Briggs Institute was performed to review empirical studies and websites. Seven electronic databases (CINAHL, Medline, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, PubMed and PsycInfo) were searched from 2010 to 2020, data extracted and synthesised using thematic analysis. The Google search engine was employed, identifying the first 100 websites, using the search term head and neck cancer. Websites meeting eligibility criteria were assessed using the QUEST analysis tool, and descriptively summarised. Results Thirteen empirical studies and 32 websites were included. As identified by empirical studies, web-based interventions were developed to provide (1) patient information on HNC and related treatments, (2) advice and support during treatment and (3) management strategies promoting adjustment to life with and beyond HNC. The reviewed websites provided minimal information to aid shared decision-making and facilitate preparedness for treatment, with few utilising patient narratives. Web-based interventions for HNC patients were mainly text based and focused on survivorship. Conclusions There is a paucity of theory-based, co-designed web-based interventions using patient narratives. Implications for Cancer Survivors As patients increasingly look to the internet for advice and support, healthcare professionals are in a position to provide high-quality web-based interventions. There is an opportunity to rigorously develop a web-based intervention, containing narratives of peoples’ lives before and after HNC treatment, aiding decision-making, preparedness for treatment and self-management.

Informing the development of an online resource for patients with oral cancer: triangulation of qualitative data from patients and healthcare professionals

“…Furthermore, accessibility and readability of information have increasingly become a focus for researchers and web designers, with the appreciation that even within a target population, there may be differing needs, abilities, and accessibility issues (58). Ascertaining the quality and authenticity of online information is also a significant issue for HNC patients (19). Within this current study, participants confirmed that knowing the online resource was being developed by HCPs with expert subject knowledge and researchers with previous patient-focused intervention development experience provided reassurance.…”

“…Within the field of HNC, there is an emergent recognition from healthcare professionals (HCPs) that the internet can help patients with decision-making, promote self-management and improve quality of life (16), but the quality of available online information is variable (17,18). A recent scoping review published by our team (19) revealed a lack of high-quality evidence-based, web-based interventions for patients with HNC, to promote shared decision-making, preparedness for treatment, or coping after treatment. Of the web-based interventions identified in this scoping review, these mainly focused on treatmentrelated survivorship issues for HNC patients.…”

“…One of the key findings from this scoping review was the paucity of expert stakeholder engagement in the planning and development of HNC online interventions (19). Many web-based interventions were designed by HCPs, then tested with patients, with only a few utilising any form of co-production methodology (1,16).…”

Interventions for head and neck cancer survivors: Systematic review

“…Future studies may address these gaps of follow-up by engaging survivors in the community using web-based recruitment and interventions. 51 Another proposed solution to loss-to-follow-up is to oversample specific subgroups such as those with higher comorbidity or higher risk of mortality. 50 Third, most of the studies we reviewed were relatively small, ranging from 10 to 217 (median 52) participants.…”

“…As patients become less mobile or have more comorbidities, there is a lower likelihood of travel to the hospital setting or participation in multi‐timepoint surveys or interventions. Future studies may address these gaps of follow‐up by engaging survivors in the community using web‐based recruitment and interventions 51 . Another proposed solution to loss‐to‐follow‐up is to oversample specific subgroups such as those with higher comorbidity or higher risk of mortality 50 …”