Improving the Patient-Clinician Interface of Clinical Trials through Health Informatics Technologies

The role of patient ergonomics in improving health research participation

Patient ergonomics advances understanding of patient work to support individuals in managing health and health care, which can be expanded to include health research. While health research enables improvements in care delivery and health outcomes, participant recruitment, enrollment, and retention challenges hamper effective research participation, impede success of research studies, and influence the validity and generalizability of findings. Recent trends in health research create new opportunities to engage patients in research but require careful attention to patient ergonomics and human factors considerations to ensure they successfully address participant needs and contexts. This article describes the research participation process and related patient ergonomics considerations, summarizes patient ergonomic factors identified in the literature that influence participation, discusses how patient ergonomics can be expanded to understand and address challenges to health research participation using two exemplar research programs, and identifies opportunities to include health research participation as part of patient ergonomics.

Research Participants' Engagement and Retention in Digital Health Interventions Research: Protocol for Mixed Methods Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Digital health interventions have become increasingly popular in recent years, expanding the possibilities for treatment for various patient groups. In clinical research, while the design of the intervention receives close attention, challenges with research participant engagement and retention persist. This may be partially due to the use of digital health platforms, which may lack adequacy for participants.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic literature review aims to investigate the relationship between digital health platforms and participant engagement and retention in clinical research. It will map and analyze key definitions of engagement and retention, as well as identify design characteristics that influence them.

METHODS

We will carry out a mixed methods systematic literature review, analyzing qualitative and quantitative studies. The search strategy includes the electronic databases PubMed, IEEE Xplore, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, APA PsycINFO, and the ACM Digital Library. The review will encompass studies published between January 2018 and June 2024. Criteria for inclusion will be the presence of digital health care interventions conducted through digital health platforms like websites, web and mobile apps used by patients, and informal caregivers as research participants. The main outcome will be a narrative analysis with key findings on the definitions of participant engagement and retention and critical factors that affect them. Quality assessment and appraisal will be done through the Mixed-Methods Assessment Tool. Data analysis and synthesis will follow the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 flow diagram. Quantitative data will be qualified and integrated into qualitative data, which will be analyzed using thematic analysis and synthesis.

RESULTS

The study expects to map and summarize critical definitions of participant engagement and retention, and the characteristics of digital health platforms that influence them. The systematic review is expected to be completed in June 2025.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review will contribute to the growing discussion on how the design of digital health intervention platforms can promote participant engagement and retention in clinical research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42024561650; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=561650.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/65099.

Clinical trial knowledge among cancer survivors in the United States: the role of health information technology

PURPOSE

Clinical trials are essential to the advancement of cancer care. However, clinical trial knowledge and participation remain critically low among adult patients with cancer. Health information technology (HIT) could play an important role in improving clinical trial knowledge and engagement among cancer survivors.

METHODS

We used data from 3,794 adults who completed the 2020 Health Information National Trends Survey, 626 (16.2%) of whom were cancer survivors. We examined the prevalence of HIT use in the study population and by cancer history using chi-squared tests. We used multivariable logistic regression models to examine the impact of HIT use on clinical trial knowledge for cancer survivors and respondents with no cancer history, respectively.

RESULTS

Approximately 63.8% of cancer survivors reported having some knowledge of clinical trials. Almost half of the cancer survivors used HIT to communicate with doctors (47.1%) and make health appointments (49.4%), 68.0% used HIT to look up health information online and 42.2% used it to check test results. In the adjusted models, the use of HIT in communicating with doctors [OR 2.79; 95% CI (1.41, 5.54)], looking up health information online [OR 2.84; 95% CI (1.04, 7.77)], and checking test results [OR 2.47; 95% CI (1.12, 5.43)] was associated with having some knowledge of clinical trials.

CONCLUSION

HIT use for engaging with the healthcare team and health information gathering is associated with higher clinical trial knowledge in cancer survivors. Given the rapid increase in mobile technology access globally and the increased use of HIT, digital technology can be leveraged to improve clinical trial knowledge and engagement among cancer survivors.

Feasibility and reliability of telemedicine examinations for respiratory distress in children: A pilot study

Respiratory disorders are a leading cause of acute care visits by children. Data establishing the reliability of telemedicine in evaluating children with respiratory concerns are limited. The overall objective of this pilot study was to evaluate the use of telemedicine to evaluate children with respiratory concerns. We performed a pilot prospective cohort study of children 12 to 71 months old presenting to the emergency department (ED) with lower respiratory tract signs and symptoms. Three examinations were performed simultaneously-one by the ED clinician with the patient, one by a remote ED clinician using telemedicine, and one by the child's parent. We evaluated measures of agreement between (a) the local and remote clinicians, (b) the local clinician and the parent, and (c) the parent and the remote clinician. Twenty-eight patients were enrolled (84 paired examinations). Except for heart rate, all examination findings evaluated (general appearance, capillary refill time, grunting, nasal flaring, shortness of breath, retractions, impression of respiratory distress, respiratory rate, and temperature) had acceptable or excellent agreement between raters. In this pilot study, we found that telemedicine respiratory examinations of young children are feasible and reliable, using readily available platforms and equipment.

Utilization of EHRs for clinical trials: a systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Clinical trials are of high importance for medical progress. This study conducted a systematic review to identify the applications of EHRs in supporting and enhancing clinical trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed was conducted on 12/3/2023 to identify relevant studies on the use of EHRs in clinical trials. Studies were included if they (1) were full-text journal articles, (2) were written in English, (3) examined applications of EHR data to support clinical trial processes (e.g. recruitment, screening, data collection). A standardized form was used by two reviewers to extract data on: study design, EHR-enabled process(es), related outcomes, and limitations.

RESULTS

Following full-text review, 19 studies met the predefined eligibility criteria and were included. Overall, included studies consistently demonstrated that EHR data integration improves clinical trial feasibility and efficiency in recruitment, screening, data collection, and trial design.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results of the present study, the use of Electronic Health Records in conducting clinical trials is very helpful. Therefore, it is better for researchers to use EHR in their studies for easy access to more accurate and comprehensive data. EHRs collects all individual data, including demographic, clinical, diagnostic, and therapeutic data. Moreover, all data is available seamlessly in EHR. In future studies, it is better to consider the cost-effectiveness of using EHR in clinical trials.

The applications of eHealth technologies in the management of asthma and allergic diseases

Portable devices, such as smartphones and mobile Internet access have become ubiquitous in the last decades. The term 'eHealth' stands for electronic health. The tools included in the eHealth concept utilize phones, computers and the Internet and related applications to improve the health care industry. Implementation of eHealth technologies has been documented for the management of different chronic diseases, including asthma and allergic conditions. Clinicians and patients have gained opportunity to communicate in new ways, which could be used cost-effectively to improve disease control and quality of life of those affected. Additionally, these innovations bring new opportunities to academic researchers. For example, eHealth has allowed researchers to compile data points that were previously unavailable or difficult to access, and analyse them using novel tools, collectively described as 'big data'. The role of eHealth become more important since early 2020, due to the physical distancing rules and the restrictions on mobility that have been applied worldwide as a response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. In this review, we summarize the most recent developments in various eHealth platforms and their relevance to the speciality of allergy and immunology, from the point of view of three major stakeholders: clinicians, patients and researchers.