1
|
Hariz AJ, Chevreul K, Daval L, Husson M, Alberti C, Michel M. Economic Evaluation of Internet-Based Psychological Interventions: A Scoping Review of Methodological Choices. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2025:S1098-3015(25)00065-8. [PMID: 39954859 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2025.01.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2024] [Revised: 01/20/2025] [Accepted: 01/28/2025] [Indexed: 02/17/2025]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Internet-based psychological interventions hold promise for cost-effectiveness; yet, their evaluation lacks standardization, potentially leading to methodological discrepancies and inconclusive results. This study aims to conduct a scoping review of economic methods used when evaluating these interventions. METHODS Articles published between January 2015 and December 2020 were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, ECONLIT, and PsychINFO. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts of relevant publications and extracted prespecified data. Outcomes related to intervention characteristics, comparators, perspective, time horizon, costs, benefits, economic endpoints, and uncertainty analysis methods were retrieved and synthetized narratively. RESULTS We identified 703 references and included 85. Seventy-four of them included a cost-utility analysis and 58 a cost-effectiveness analysis, with 47 carrying out both. The comparator was treatment as usual in 52 studies (61.2%) but varied widely across studies. A societal perspective was adopted in 60 studies, supplemented by a healthcare perspective in half. Time horizon was 1 year or less in 68 articles (80.0%). Intervention costs (71/85 studies) predominantly covered delivery costs (45/71 studies), whereas development and promotional costs were infrequently considered (respectively, 14 and 5/71 studies). Interventions' reach, opportunity costs, user engagement, and equity issues were rarely addressed. Key factors influencing cost-effectiveness included perspective, time horizon, costs included, and methods for handling missing data. CONCLUSIONS Assessment of cost-effectiveness in internet-based psychological interventions shows variability, potentially affecting efficiency evidence. Conventional methods are often favored overlooking digital tools' specificities. Tailored guidelines for such evaluations could be helpful for standardized and reliable evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amira J Hariz
- ECEVE, UMR 1123, INSERM, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France; Hôpital Robert Debré, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France.
| | - Karine Chevreul
- ECEVE, UMR 1123, INSERM, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France; Hôpital Robert Debré, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Laure Daval
- ECEVE, UMR 1123, INSERM, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France
| | - Mathilde Husson
- Hôpital Robert Debré, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Corinne Alberti
- ECEVE, UMR 1123, INSERM, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France; Hôpital Robert Debré, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Morgane Michel
- ECEVE, UMR 1123, INSERM, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France; Hôpital Robert Debré, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
van Hof KS, Hoesseini A, Dorr MC, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM, Jansen F, Leemans CR, Takes RP, Terhaard CHJ, de Jong RJB, Sewnaik A, Offerman MPJ. Unmet supportive care needs among informal caregivers of patients with head and neck cancer in the first 2 years after diagnosis and treatment: a prospective cohort study. Support Care Cancer 2023; 31:262. [PMID: 37052712 PMCID: PMC10101897 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-07670-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2022] [Accepted: 03/05/2023] [Indexed: 04/14/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Informal caregivers of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients have a high caregiver burden and often face complex practical caregiving tasks. This may result in unmet supportive care needs, which can impact their quality of life (QoL) and cause psychological distress. In this study, we identify caregivers' unmet needs during long-term follow-up and identify caregivers prone to unmet supportive care needs. METHODS Data were used from the multicenter prospective cohort study NETherlands QUality of life and Biomedical cohort studies In Cancer (NET-QUBIC). The unmet supportive care needs, psychological distress, caregiver burden, and QoL were measured for 234 informal caregivers and their related patients at baseline, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after. Mixed effect models for repeated measurements were used. RESULTS At baseline, most caregivers (70.3%) reported at least one unmet supportive care need, with most of the identified needs in the "healthcare & illness" domain. During the follow-up period, caregivers' unmet needs decreased significantly in all domains. Nevertheless, 2 years after treatment, 28.3% were still reporting at least one unmet need. Financial problems were increasingly associated with unmet needs over time. Furthermore, caring for a patient who themselves had many unmet needs, an advanced tumor stage, or severe comorbidity was associated with significantly more unmet needs in caregivers. CONCLUSIONS The current study shows the strong likelihood of caregivers of HNC patients facing unmet supportive care needs and the interaction between the needs of patients and caregivers. It is important to optimally support informal caregivers by involving them from the start when counseling patients, by providing them with relevant and understandable information, and by referring vulnerable caregivers for (psychosocial) support.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kira S van Hof
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Arta Hoesseini
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maarten C Dorr
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw
- Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van Der Boechorststraat 7-9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Amsterdam Public Health, Mental Health, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Femke Jansen
- Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van Der Boechorststraat 7-9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C Réne Leemans
- Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Robert P Takes
- Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Chris H J Terhaard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Robert J Baatenburg de Jong
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Aniel Sewnaik
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marinella P J Offerman
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
De Ravin E, Armache M, Campbell F, Rising KL, Worster B, Handley NR, Fundakowski CE, Cognetti DM, Mady LJ. Feasibility and Cost of Telehealth Head and Neck Cancer Survivorship Care: A Systematic Review. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2023; 168:1312-1323. [PMID: 36939546 DOI: 10.1002/ohn.213] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2022] [Revised: 10/28/2022] [Accepted: 11/12/2022] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Evaluate the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of telehealth head and neck cancer (HNC) survivorship care. DATA SOURCES Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL. REVIEW METHODS A systematic search for peer-reviewed feasibility studies on telehealth models for HNC survivorship care published between 2005 and 2021 was conducted using the terms "head and neck cancer" and "telehealth" and their synonyms. Inclusion criteria were studies on telehealth survivorship program interventions for HNC patients with quantitative feasibility outcome measures (eg, enrollment, retention, attrition/dropout rate, adherence/task completion rate, patient satisfaction, cost). RESULTS Thirty-eight studies out of 1557 identified met inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. Feasibility outcomes evaluated were enrollment and attrition rates, adherence/task completion rates, patient satisfaction, and user feedback surveys in different survivorship domains. Patient enrollment ranged from 20.8% to 85.7%, while attrition ranged from 7% to 47.7%. Overall, adherence was 30.2% higher in the intervention group than in the control group (46.8% vs 16.6%). Studies with cost analysis found telehealth models of care to be statistically significantly less expensive and more cost-efficient than the standard model of care, with a $642.30 saving per patient (n = 3). Telehealth models also substantially reduced work time saving per visit (on average, 7 days per visit). CONCLUSION While telehealth survivorship programs are feasible and cost-effective and are associated with improved patient outcomes, they might not be ideal for every patient. Further investigations are needed to understand the role of telehealth in survivorship care, given the variability in study design, reporting, measures, and methodological quality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma De Ravin
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.,Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Maria Armache
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Frank Campbell
- Penn Libraries, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Kristin L Rising
- Jefferson Center for Connected Care, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.,Department of Emergency Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Brooke Worster
- Department of Hospice and Palliative Care, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Nathan R Handley
- Department of Medical Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Christopher E Fundakowski
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - David M Cognetti
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Leila J Mady
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Holländer-Mieritz C, Elsborg AMJ, Kristensen CA, Rogers SN, Pappot H, Piil K. Recommendations for a Patient Concerns Inventory specific to patients with head and neck cancer receiving palliative treatment. Support Care Cancer 2023; 31:54. [DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-07471-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2022] [Accepted: 11/07/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
|
5
|
Schuit AS, Rienks MM, Hooghiemstra N, Jansen F, Lissenberg-Witte BI, Cuijpers P, Leeuw IMVD, Holtmaat K. Reach and efficacy of the eHealth application Oncokompas, facilitating partners of incurably ill cancer patients to self-manage their caregiver needs: a randomized controlled trial. Support Care Cancer 2022; 30:10191-10201. [PMID: 36367563 PMCID: PMC9650170 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-07441-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2022] [Accepted: 10/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
Many partners of incurably ill cancer patients experience caregiver burden. The eHealth application “Oncokompas” supports these partners to manage their caregiver needs and to find optimal supportive care for themselves. The aim of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to investigate the reach of Oncokompas and its efficacy on caregiver burden, self-efficacy, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL).
Methods
The reach was estimated based on eligibility, participation rate, and an evaluation of the recruitment process. Efficacy on caregiver burden was measured using the Caregiver Strain Index + (CSI +). Secondary outcomes were self-efficacy (General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE)) and HRQOL (EQ-5D VAS). Assessments were scheduled at baseline, 2 weeks after randomization and 3 months after baseline. Linear mixed models were used to compare longitudinal changes between the experimental and control group from baseline to the 3-month follow-up.
Results
The reach, in terms of eligibility and participation rate, was estimated at 83–91%. Partners were most likely reached via palliative care consultants, patient organizations, and palliative care networks. In the one-and-a-half-year recruitment period and via the 101 organizations involved, 58 partners were included. There were no significant effects of Oncokompas on caregiver burden, self-efficacy, or HRQOL.
Conclusion
The reach of Oncokompas among interested individuals was high, but the difficulties that were encountered to include partners suggest that the reach in real life may be lower. This study showed no effect of Oncokompas on caregiver burden, self-efficacy, or HRQOL in partners of incurably ill cancer patients.
Relevance
The results of this study may be used in the process of developing, efficacy testing, and implementing eHealth applications for caregivers of incurably ill cancer patients.
Trial registration
Netherlands Trial Register identifier: NTR7636/NL7411. Registered on November 23, 2018 (https://www.trialregister.nl/).
Collapse
|
6
|
Feasibility study of a self-guided internet-based intervention for family caregivers of patients with cancer (OAse). Sci Rep 2022; 12:16713. [PMID: 36202913 PMCID: PMC9537301 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-21157-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2022] [Accepted: 09/23/2022] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Despite high levels of distress, family caregivers of patients with cancer rarely seek psychosocial support and Internet-based interventions (IBIs) are a promising approach to reduce some access barriers. Therefore, we developed a self-guided IBI for family caregivers of patients with cancer (OAse), which, in addition to patients' spouses, also addresses other family members (e.g., adult children, parents). This study aimed to determine the feasibility of OAse (recruitment, dropout, adherence, participant satisfaction). Secondary outcomes were caregivers’ self-efficacy, emotional state, and supportive care needs. N = 41 family caregivers participated in the study (female: 65%), mostly spouses (71%), followed by children (20%), parents (7%), and friends (2%). Recruitment (47%), retention (68%), and adherence rates (76% completed at least 4 of 6 lessons) support the feasibility of OAse. Overall, the results showed a high degree of overall participant satisfaction (96%). There were no significant pre-post differences in secondary outcome criteria, but a trend toward improvement in managing difficult interactions/emotions (p = .06) and depression/anxiety (p = .06). Although the efficacy of the intervention remains to be investigated, our results suggest that OAse can be well implemented in caregivers’ daily lives and has the potential to improve family caregivers’ coping strategies.
Collapse
|
7
|
Berkley A. Support for adult survivors of lymphoma: a literature review. BRITISH JOURNAL OF NURSING (MARK ALLEN PUBLISHING) 2022; 31:S12-S16. [PMID: 36149416 DOI: 10.12968/bjon.2022.31.17.s12] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND After the completion of chemotherapy, survivors of lymphoma are at risk of developing late effects of their cancer treatment, which can negatively impact their quality of life. Despite the recommendations for support after active treatment ceases, there is a recognised risk that survivors' needs may not be met. AIM To review the existing literature surrounding professional support in survivorship to establish whether people's needs are being met. METHOD A literature review and thematic analysis of 22 primary research articles. FINDINGS Specialist support and primary care involvement were identified as the two main themes of professional support. Provider-related barriers and individual differences impact the effectiveness of the available support in survivorship. CONCLUSION Following guidelines and understanding an individual's personal needs following treatment will help to ensure that survivors receive the right support. Further research with survivors of lymphoma is required to improve outcomes in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ashleigh Berkley
- Haematology Staff Nurse, Singleton Hospital, Swansea Bay University Health Board, Swansea
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Schuit AS, Holtmaat K, Lissenberg-Witte BI, Eerenstein SE, Zijlstra JM, Eeltink C, Becker-Commissaris A, van Zuylen L, van Linde ME, Menke-van der Houven van Oordt CW, Sommeijer DW, Verbeek N, Bosscha K, Tewarie RN, Sedee RJ, de Bree R, de Graeff A, de Vos F, Cuijpers P, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM. Efficacy of the eHealth application Oncokompas, facilitating incurably ill cancer patients to self-manage their palliative care needs: A randomized controlled trial. THE LANCET REGIONAL HEALTH. EUROPE 2022; 18:100390. [PMID: 35496496 PMCID: PMC9046636 DOI: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2022.100390] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many patients with incurable cancer have symptoms affecting their health-related quality of life. The eHealth application 'Oncokompas' supports patients to take an active role in managing their palliative care needs, to reduce symptoms and improve health-related quality of life (HRQOL). This randomized controlled trial was conducted to determine the efficacy of Oncokompas compared to care as usual among incurably ill cancer patients with a life expectancy of more than three months. METHODS Patients were recruited in six hospitals in the Netherlands. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to the intervention (direct access to Oncokompas) or the control group (access to Oncokompas after three months). The primary outcome measure was patient activation (i.e., patients' knowledge, skills and confidence for self-management). Secondary outcomes were general self-efficacy and HRQOL. Measures were assessed at baseline, two weeks after randomization, and three months after the baseline measurement. Linear mixed models were used to compare longitudinal changes between both groups from baseline to the three-month follow-up. FINDINGS In total, 219 patients were eligible of which 138 patients completed the baseline questionnaire (response rate 63%), and were randomized to the intervention (69) or control group (69). There were no significant differences between the intervention and control group over time in patient activation (estimated difference in change T0-T2; 1·8 (90% CI: -1·0 to 4·7)), neither in general self-efficacy and HRQOL. Of the patients in the intervention group who activated their account, 74% used Oncokompas as intended. The course of patient activation, general self-efficacy, and HRQOL was not significantly different between patients who used Oncokompas as intended versus those who did not. INTERPRETATION Among incurably ill cancer patients with a life expectancy of more than three months and recruited in the hospital setting, Oncokompas did not significantly improve patient activation, self-efficacy, or HRQOL. FUNDING ZonMw, Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (844001105).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anouk S. Schuit
- Department of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam (CCA), Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Karen Holtmaat
- Department of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam (CCA), Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Simone E.J. Eerenstein
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Josée M. Zijlstra
- Department of Hematology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Corien Eeltink
- Department of Hematology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Annemarie Becker-Commissaris
- Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lia van Zuylen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Myra E. van Linde
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Dirkje W. Sommeijer
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Internal Medicine, Flevo Hospital, Almere, the Netherlands
| | - Nol Verbeek
- Department of Oncology, St. Antonius hospital, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | | | - Robert-Jan Sedee
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Haaglanden MC, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | - Remco de Bree
- Department of Head and Neck Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Alexander de Graeff
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Filip de Vos
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Pim Cuijpers
- Department of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Irma M. Verdonck-de Leeuw
- Department of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam (CCA), Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Bodschwinna D, Lorenz I, Bauereiß N, Gündel H, Baumeister H, Hönig K. A psycho-oncological online intervention supporting partners of patients with cancer (PartnerCARE): Results from a randomized controlled feasibility trial. Psychooncology 2022; 31:1230-1242. [PMID: 35233880 DOI: 10.1002/pon.5917] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2021] [Revised: 02/18/2022] [Accepted: 02/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Partners of cancer patients are the primary supporters and burdened at the same time. Support for partners is hitherto scarce and existing offers are rarely used. The PartnerCARE online intervention was specifically developed to address the caregiving partners' needs. This two-arm parallel randomized controlled trial evaluates the feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of PartnerCARE. METHODS Sixty German-speaking partners of patients with various cancer entities were randomized into two conditions: intervention group with PartnerCARE (N=30) or waitlist-control group (N=30). Participants completed online questionnaires at baseline (T0), post-treatment (T1) and four-months follow-up (T2). Feasibility and acceptability outcomes included dropout rates, use and acceptance of PartnerCARE, individual user/e-coach feedback as well as negative effects. Relevant efficacy outcomes were assessed to test for potential intervention effects. RESULTS Recruitment success illustrates demand for and acceptability of PartnerCARE. Satisfaction with the intervention was high (CSQ-I, T1: M=24.66, SD=6.42) and 73.3 % of participants completed the intervention. Study dropout rate was low (T1: 17%, T2: 29%). More positive than negative side effects of the intervention were identified, and negative ones were mainly related to 'intrapersonal change'. For efficacy outcomes we found effects over time, with strongest effects within the intervention group from T0 to T1 in psychological distress (d=0.73, 95%-CI: [0.34; 1.12]) and anxiety (0.66, [0.26; 1.04]), but no group effects were significant at T1 and T2. CONCLUSIONS PartnerCARE is feasible, acceptable and potentially efficacious. Based on received feedback, PartnerCARE is currently undergoing further development and subsequently efficacy will be investigated in a randomized controlled trial. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela Bodschwinna
- Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Ulm, Germany.,Comprehensive Cancer Center Ulm (CCCU), Germany
| | - Inga Lorenz
- Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Ulm, Germany
| | - Natalie Bauereiß
- Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology and Education, Ulm University, Germany
| | - Harald Gündel
- Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Ulm, Germany
| | - Harald Baumeister
- Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology and Education, Ulm University, Germany
| | - Klaus Hönig
- Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Ulm, Germany.,Comprehensive Cancer Center Ulm (CCCU), Germany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Su Z, Li X, McDonnell D, Fernandez AA, Flores BE, Wang J. Technology-Based Interventions for Cancer Caregivers: Concept Analysis. JMIR Cancer 2021; 7:e22140. [PMID: 34783664 PMCID: PMC8663574 DOI: 10.2196/22140] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2020] [Revised: 12/01/2020] [Accepted: 10/13/2021] [Indexed: 01/16/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Cancer is a taxing chronic disease that demands substantial care, most of which is shouldered by informal caregivers. As a result, cancer caregivers often have to manage considerable challenges that could result in severe physical and psychological health consequences. Technology-based interventions have the potential to address many, if not all, of the obstacles caregivers encounter while caring for patients with cancer. However, although the application of technology-based interventions is on the rise, the term is seldom defined in research or practice. Considering that the lack of conceptual clarity of the term could compromise the effectiveness of technology-based interventions for cancer caregivers, timely research is needed to bridge this gap. Objective This study aims to clarify the meaning of technology-based interventions in the context of cancer caregiving and provide a definition that can be used by cancer caregivers, patients, clinicians, and researchers to facilitate evidence-based research and practice. Methods The 8-step concept analysis method by Walker and Avant was used to analyze the concept of technology-based interventions in the context of cancer caregiving. PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus were searched for studies that examined technology-based interventions for cancer caregivers. Results The defining attributes of technology-based interventions were recognized as being accessible, affordable, convenient, and user-friendly. On the basis of insights gained on the defining attributes, antecedents to, and consequences of technology-based interventions through the concept analysis process, technology-based interventions were defined as the use of technology to design, develop, and deliver health promotion contents and strategies aimed at inducing or improving positive physical or psychological health outcomes in cancer caregivers. Conclusions This study clarified the meaning of technology-based interventions in the context of cancer caregiving and provided a clear definition that can be used by caregivers, patients, clinicians, and researchers to facilitate evidence-based oncology practice. A clear conceptualization of technology-based interventions lays foundations for better intervention design and research outcomes, which in turn have the potential to help health care professionals address the needs and preferences of cancer caregivers more cost-effectively.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhaohui Su
- Center on Smart and Connected Health Technologies, School of Nursing, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, United States
| | - Xiaoshan Li
- Program of Public Relations and Advertising, Beijing Normal University-Hong Kong Baptist University United International College, Zhuhai, China
| | - Dean McDonnell
- Department of Humanities, Institute of Technology, Carlow, Ireland
| | - Andrea A Fernandez
- School of Nursing, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, United States
| | - Bertha E Flores
- School of Nursing, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, United States
| | - Jing Wang
- Florida State University College of Nursing, Tallahassee, FL, United States
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Digitalized healthcare for head and neck cancer patients. JOURNAL OF STOMATOLOGY, ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY 2020; 122:434-440. [PMID: 33242658 DOI: 10.1016/j.jormas.2020.11.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2020] [Accepted: 11/05/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
The ongoing shortage in healthcare services and the increasing cancer incidence, highlight the need for new strategies to ensure optimal treatments, cares and follow-up for all patients. Digitalized healthcare, which includes various concepts (digital health, telemedicine, telemonitoring and digital therapeutics), are a promising option to meet these needs. In this scoping review, we provide an overview of the recent available research evidence on digitalized healthcare for HNC patients and caregivers. Through the interrogation of PubMed and Cochrane Library databases, a total of 32 relevant articles reporting the use of digitalized healthcare in different settings of HNC patients' care management, were analyzed. Overall, HNC patients as well as caregivers were highly satisfied, especially because digitalized healthcare allows the early detection of health disorders, improve patient's management, quality of life, self-confidence and communication. Furthermore, digitalized healthcare were significantly time- and cost-effective. While the benefits digitalized healthcare has been reported to be feasible and clinically relevant, our future efforts should focus on the demonstration of their clinical utility in well-designed clinical trials. It is tempting to anticipate that this approach will improve patients' management and quality of life and change the way patients interact with family and professional health care givers.
Collapse
|