Monitoring symptoms at home: what methods would cancer patients be comfortable using?

Kleiboer, Annet; Gowing, Katie; Hansen, Christian Holm; Hibberd, Carina; Hodges, Laura; Walker, Jane; Thekkumpurath, Parvez; O’Connor, Mark J.; Murray, Gordon D.; Sharpe, Michael

doi:10.1007/s11136-010-9662-0

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Earlier studies have also shown how factors related to the systems structure and login procedures affect use [16,55]. In addition, it has been emphasized that a clear and shared understanding of the features available in the communication service is essential and that providing information at the time of enrollment can increase use of the system [22,56]. Other studies have found that lack of training is a barrier to use of email by patients with cancer [57] and that many people will not be able to make use of eHealth technologies without at the same time being offered support in how to use the services [58].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients’ Reported Reasons for Non-Use of an Internet-Based Patient-Provider Communication Service: Qualitative Interview Study

Varsi¹,

Gammon²,

Wibe³

et al. 2013

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe adoption of Internet-based patient–provider communication services (IPPC) in health care has been slow. Patients want electronic communication, and the quality of health care can be improved by offering such IPPCs. However, the rate of enrollment in such services remains low, and the reasons for this are unclear. Knowledge about the barriers to use is valuable during implementation of IPPCs in the health care services, and it can help timing, targeting, and tailoring IPPCs to different groups of patients.ObjectiveThe goal of our study was to investigate patients’ views of an IPPC that they could use from home to pose questions to nurses and physicians at their treatment facility, and their reported reasons for non-use of the service.MethodsThis qualitative study was based on individual interviews with 22 patients who signed up for, but did not use, the IPPC.ResultsPatients appreciated the availability and the possibility of using the IPPC as needed, even if they did not use it. Their reported reasons for not using the IPPC fell into three main categories: (1) they felt that they did not need the IPPC and had sufficient access to information elsewhere, (2) they preferred other types of communication such as telephone or face-to-face contact, or (3) they were hindered by IPPC attributes such as login problems.ConclusionsPatients were satisfied with having the opportunity to send messages to health care providers through an IPPC, even if they did not use the service. IPPCs should be offered to the patients at an appropriate time in the illness trajectory, both when they need the service and when they are receptive to information about the service. A live demonstration of the IPPC at the point of enrollment might have increased its use.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00971139; http://clinicaltrial.gov/ct2/show/NCT00971139 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6KlOiYJrW).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients’ Reported Reasons for Non-Use of an Internet-Based Patient-Provider Communication Service: Qualitative Interview Study

Varsi¹,

Gammon²,

Wibe³

et al. 2013

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One randomized trial of a mobile phone–based symptom-reporting system reported benefits to patients in the intervention group, 32 but another study 33 noted that their sample of 477 cancer patients preferred more “traditional” means of symptom reporting (e.g., paper, calling a nurse, in-person visit), compared with secure websites, text-messaging, or interactive voice response. Persistent challenges related to information-seeking include the credibility and trustworthiness of web-based information, and the uneven access to web-based resources among different subpopulations.…”

Section: Role Of Information Technology In Supporting Modern Cancer Carementioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Modern Cancer Care Through Information Technology

Clauser

Wagner

Bowles

et al. 2011

American Journal of Preventive Medicine

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cancer care system is increasingly complex, marked by multiple hand-offs between primary care and specialty providers, inadequate communication among providers, and lack of clarity about a “medical home” (the ideal accountable care provider) for cancer patients. Patients and families often cite such difficulties as information deficits, uncoordinated care, and insufficient psychosocial support. This article presents a review of the challenges of delivering well coordinated, patient-centered cancer care in a complex modern healthcare system. An examination is made of the potential role of information technology (IT) advances to help both providers and patients. Using the published literature as background, a review is provided of selected work that is underway to improve communication, coordination, and quality of care. Also discussed are additional challenges and opportunities to advancing understanding of how patient data, provider and patient involvement, and informatics innovations can support high-quality cancer care.

show abstract

“…However, patient and professional preferences for face‐to‐face support (Kimman, Dellaert, Boersma, Lambin, & Dirksen, ) and resistance to adopt remote communication technologies (i.e. e‐mail, mobile phone text message and computer‐generated calls) (Kleiboer et al., ) highlight potential conflict regarding the best method of providing support for patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acceptability of telephone support as perceived by patients with cancer: A systematic review

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Telephone‐based interventions can increase accessibility to healthcare and are increasingly used as a convenient method of providing support. We conducted a systematic review of published literature reporting adult patients’ perceptions of the acceptability of, and satisfaction with, telephone‐based interventions during or post‐treatment for cancer. Systematic searches identified 4,855 articles. Forty‐eight articles describing 50 studies were included in the review. Three intervention categories were identified post hoc: (1) telephone follow‐up in lieu of routine hospital follow‐up, (2) telephone interventions for treatment side‐effect monitoring and toxicity management supplementary to usual care, and (3) supplementary psycho‐educational telephone interventions. Across studies, some consistent findings emerged. Positive perceptions emphasised the convenience of telephone interventions and increased accessibility to care. Conflicting perceptions of the quality of the support received, the impact of telecare on the patient–healthcare professional relationship and the need for such interventions emerged. In conclusion, the evidence base relating to patients’ perceptions of telephone‐based interventions is increasing. Interpretation of findings is currently limited by methodological limitations in the primary research. The instruments chosen to assess patient satisfaction quantitatively do not always reflect the patient‐centred priorities that emerge from qualitative data. Subsequent research would benefit from well‐designed qualitative studies and patient‐centred outcome measures to ensure that the individuality of participants’ positive and negative experiences is captured.

show abstract

Monitoring symptoms at home: what methods would cancer patients be comfortable using?

Abstract: Purpose This study aimed to determine which methods of remote symptom assessment cancer outpatients would be comfortable using, including those involving information technology, and whether this varied with age and gender.

Cited by 17 publications

References 17 publications

Patients’ Reported Reasons for Non-Use of an Internet-Based Patient-Provider Communication Service: Qualitative Interview Study

Patients’ Reported Reasons for Non-Use of an Internet-Based Patient-Provider Communication Service: Qualitative Interview Study

Improving Modern Cancer Care Through Information Technology

Acceptability of telephone support as perceived by patients with cancer: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About