Health information technology to support cancer survivorship care planning: A systematic review

Who uses connected health technologies after a cancer diagnosis? evidence from the US Health Information National Trends Survey

PURPOSE

As the number of people living with and beyond cancer increases, connected health technologies offer promise to enhance access to care and support, while reducing costs. However, uptake of connected health technologies may vary depending on sociodemographic and health-related variables. This study aimed to investigate demographic and health predictors of connected health technology use among people living with and beyond cancer.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data from the US Health Information National Trends Survey Version 5 Cycle 4 (H5c4) was used. Regression analysis was used to examine associations between sociodemographic factors and the use of connected health technologies. The sample was restricted to individuals who self-reported a cancer diagnosis or history of cancer.

RESULTS

In this cycle, 626 respondents self-reported a cancer diagnosis, with 41.1% using connected health technologies (health and wellness apps and/or wearable devices). Most were female (58.9%) and white (82.5%); 43.4% had graduated college or higher education. One third (33.6%) had a household income of $75,000 or more. Respondents who were younger, have higher education, were living as married, had higher incomes, had higher self-rated health and had higher health-related self-efficacy were significantly more likely to use connected health technologies. There were no significant associations between gender, race, stratum, time since diagnosis, history of anxiety or depression, and use of connected health technologies among people living with and beyond cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Connected health technology use among people living with and beyond cancer is associated with sociodemographic factors. Future research should examine these demographic disparities as the use of connected health technologies in healthcare continues to gather momentum.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

The study underscores a disparity in connected heath technology usage among people living with and beyond cancer. There is a pressing need for research into adoption barriers and interventions to ensure equitable digital healthcare integration among this population, especially with the heightened adoption of technology post COVID-19 pandemic.

Myths and Presumptions About Cancer Survivorship

Identifying cancer survivorship myths and presumptions perpetuated in survivorship circles.

Relationship between survivorship care plans and unmet information needs, quality of life, satisfaction with care, and propensity to engage with, and attend, follow-up care

BACKGROUND

The impact of survivorship care plans (SCPs) on the proximal and distal outcomes of adult and childhood cancer survivors, and parent proxies, is unclear. This study aimed to determine the relationship between SCP receipt and these outcomes.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of adult and childhood cancer survivors (and parent proxies for survivors aged younger than 16 years) across Australia and New Zealand was conducted. Multivariate regression models were fitted to measure the impact of SCP receipt on proximal (unmet information needs and propensity to engage with, and attend, cancer-related follow-up care) and distal outcomes (quality of life and satisfaction with cancer-related follow-up care) with control for cancer history and sociodemographic factors.

RESULTS

Of 1123 respondents, 499 were adult cancer survivors and 624 were childhood cancer survivors (including 222 parent proxies). We found that SCP receipt was predictive of greater attendance at, and awareness of, cancer-related follow-up care (adult: odds ratio [OR], 2.46; 95% CI, 1.18-5.12; OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.07-5.29; child/parent: OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.63-4.17; OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.06-2.50; respectively). SCP receipt also predicted fewer unmet information needs related to "follow-up care required" and "possible late effects" (adult: OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20-0.96; OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13-0.64; child/parent: OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.30-0.72; OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38-0.85; respectively). In terms of distal outcomes, SCP receipt predicted a better global quality of life for adult cancer survivors (β, 0.08; 95% CI, -0.01-7.93), proxy-reported health-related quality of life (β, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.44-7.12), and satisfaction with follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors (OR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.64-5.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Previous studies have shown little impact of SCPs on distal end points. Results suggest that SCPs may be beneficial to cancer survivors' proximal and distal outcomes.

Use of Cancer Survivorship Care Guidelines by Primary Care Providers in the United States

BACKGROUND

National organizations have issued comprehensive cancer survivorship care guidelines to improve care of cancer survivors, many of whom receive care from primary care providers (PCPs).

METHODS

We analyzed Porter Novelli's 2019 fall DocStyles survey to assess use of cancer survivorship care guidelines, receipt of survivorship training, types of survivorship services provided, and confidence providing care among PCPs in the United States. We grouped PCPs by use of any guideline ("users") versus no guideline use ("nonusers"). We calculated descriptive statistics and conducted multivariable logistic regression analyses to examine guideline use, having received training on providing survivorship care services, and confidence in providing care. Within the panel, sampling quotas were set so that 1000 primary care physicians, 250 OB/GYNs, 250 pediatricians, and 250 nurse practitioners/physician assistants were recruited.

RESULTS

To reach selected quotas, 2696 health professionals were initially contacted to participate, resulting in a response rate of 64.9%. Sixty-two percent of PCPs reported using guidelines and 17% reported receiving survivorship care training. Use of any guidelines or receiving training was associated with reporting providing a range of survivorship services and confidence in providing care. After adjusting for demographic characteristics, guideline users were more likely than nonusers to report assessing genetic cancer risk (OR = 2.65 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.68, 4.17)), screening for cancer recurrence (OR = 2.32 95% CI (1.70, 3.18)) or a new cancer (OR = 1.63, 95% CI (1.20, 2.22)), and treating depression (OR = 1.64, 95% CI (1.20, 2.25)). Receipt of training was also positively associated with providing genetic risk assessment, surveillance for recurrence, as well as assessing late/long-term effects, and treating pain, fatigue, and sexual side effects.

CONCLUSION

Survivorship care guidelines and training support PCPs in providing a range of survivorship care services.

Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated remote cancer care delivery via the internet and telephone, rapidly accelerating an already growing care delivery model and associated research. This scoping review of reviews characterised the peer-reviewed literature reviews on digital health and telehealth interventions in cancer published from database inception up to May 1, 2022, from PubMed, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Cochrane Reviews, and Web of Science. Eligible reviews conducted a systematic literature search. Data were extracted in duplicate via a pre-defined online survey. Following screening, 134 reviews met the eligibility criteria. 77 of those reviews were published since 2020. 128 reviews summarised interventions intended for patients, 18 addressed family caregivers, and five addressed health-care providers. 56 reviews did not target a specific phase of the cancer continuum, whereas 48 reviews tended to address the active treatment phase. 29 reviews included a meta-analysis, with results showing positive effects on quality of life, psychological outcomes, and screening behaviours. 83 reviews did not report intervention implementation outcomes but when reported, 36 reported acceptability, 32 feasibility, and 29 fidelity outcomes. Several notable gaps were identified in these literature reviews on digital health and telehealth in cancer care. No reviews specifically addressed older adults, bereavement, or sustainability of interventions and only two reviews focused on comparing telehealth to in-person interventions. Addressing these gaps with rigorous systematic reviews might help guide continued innovation in remote cancer care, particularly for older adults and bereaved families, and integrate and sustain these interventions within oncology.

Adaptation of a Personalized Electronic Care Planning Tool for Cancer Follow-up Care: Formative Study

BACKGROUND

Most patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer will survive for at least 5 years; thus, engaging patients to optimize their health will likely improve outcomes. Clinical guidelines recommend patients receive a comprehensive care plan (CP) when transitioning from active treatment to survivorship, which includes support for ongoing symptoms and recommended healthy behaviors. Yet, cancer care providers find this guideline difficult to implement. Future directions for survivorship care planning include enhancing information technology support for developing personalized CPs, using CPs to facilitate self-management, and assessing CPs in clinical settings.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to develop an electronic tool for colorectal cancer follow-up care (CFC) planning.

METHODS

Incorporating inputs from health care professionals and patient stakeholders is fundamental to the successful integration of any tool into the clinical workflow. Thus, we followed the Integrate, Design, Assess, and Share (IDEAS) framework to adapt an existing application for stroke care planning (COMPASS-CP) to meet the needs of colorectal cancer survivors (COMPASS-CP CFC). Constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided our approach. We completed this work in 3 phases: (1) gathering qualitative feedback from stakeholders about the follow-up CP generation design and workflow; (2) adapting algorithms and resource data sources needed to generate a follow-up CP; and (3) optimizing the usability of the adapted prototype of COMPASS-CP CFC. We also quantitatively measured usability (target average score ≥70; range 0-100), acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility.

RESULTS

In the first phase, health care professionals (n=7), and patients and caregivers (n=7) provided qualitative feedback on COMPASS-CP CFC that informed design elements such as selection, interpretation, and clinical usefulness of patient-reported measures. In phase 2, we built a minimal viable product of COMPASS-CP CFC. This tool generated CPs based on the needs identified by patient-completed measures (including validated patient-reported outcomes) and electronic health record data, which were then matched with resources by zip code and preference to support patients' self-management. Elements of the CFIR assessed revealed that most health care professionals believed the tool would serve patients' needs and had advantages. In phase 3, the average System Usability Scale score was above our target score for health care professionals (n=5; mean 71.0, SD 15.2) and patients (n=5; mean 95.5, SD 2.1). Participants also reported high levels of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Additional CFIR-informed feedback, such as desired format for training, will inform future studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The data collected in this study support the initial usability of COMPASS-CP CFC and will inform the next steps for implementation in clinical care. COMPASS-CP CFC has the potential to streamline the implementation of personalized CFC planning to enable systematic access to resources that will support self-management. Future research is needed to test the impact of COMPASS-CP CFC on patient health outcomes.

Digital Health Interventions for Adult Patients With Cancer Evaluated in Randomized Controlled Trials: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Digital care has become an essential component of health care. Interventions for patients with cancer need to be effective and safe, and digital health interventions must adhere to the same requirements.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify currently available digital health interventions developed and evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) targeting adult patients with cancer.

METHODS

A scoping review using the JBI methodology was conducted. The participants were adult patients with cancer, and the concept was digital health interventions. The context was open, and sources were limited to RCT effectiveness studies. The PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, Research Information Sharing Service, and KoreaMed databases were searched. Data were extracted and analyzed to achieve summarized results about the participants, types, functions, and outcomes of digital health interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 231 studies were reviewed. Digital health interventions were used mostly at home (187/231, 81%), and the web-based intervention was the most frequently used intervention modality (116/231, 50.2%). Interventions consisting of multiple functional components were most frequently identified (69/231, 29.9%), followed by those with the self-manage function (67/231, 29%). Web-based interventions targeting symptoms with the self-manage and multiple functions and web-based interventions to treat cognitive function and fear of cancer recurrence consistently achieved positive outcomes. More studies supported the positive effects of web-based interventions to inform decision-making and knowledge. The effectiveness of digital health interventions targeting anxiety, depression, distress, fatigue, health-related quality of life or quality of life, pain, physical activity, and sleep was subject to their type and function. A relatively small number of digital health interventions specifically targeted older adults (6/231, 2.6%) or patients with advanced or metastatic cancer (22/231, 9.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review summarized digital health interventions developed and evaluated in RCTs involving adult patients with cancer. Systematic reviews of the identified digital interventions are strongly recommended to integrate digital health interventions into clinical practice. The identified gaps in digital health interventions for cancer care need to be reflected in future digital health research.

The Real-Time and Patient-Specific Prediction for Duration and Recovery Profile of Cisatracurium Based on Deep Learning Models

During general anesthesia, how to judge the patient’s muscle relaxation state has always been one of the most significant issues for anesthesiologists. Train-of-four ratio (TOFR) monitoring is a standard method, which can only obtain static data to judge the current situation of muscle relaxation. Cisatracurium is a nondepolarizing benzylisoquinoline muscle relaxant. Real-time prediction of TOFR could help anesthesiologists to evaluate the duration and recovery profile of cisatracurium. TOFR of cisatracurium could be regarded as temporal sequence data, which could be processed and predicted using RNN based deep learning methods. In this work, we performed RNN, GRU, and LSTM models for TOFR prediction. We used transfer learning based on patient similarity derived from BMI and age to achieve real-time and patient-specific prediction. The GRU model achieved the best performance. In transfer learning, the model chosen based on patient similarity has significantly outperformed the model chosen randomly. Our work verified the feasibility of real-time prediction for TOFR of cisatracurium, which had practical significance in general anesthesia. Meanwhile, using the patient demographic data in transfer learning, our work could also achieve the patient-specific prediction, having theoretical value for the clinical research of precision medicine.