Outcomes of a randomized controlled trial assessing a smartphone Application to reduce unmet needs among people diagnosed with CancEr (ACE).

BACKGROUND: Smartphone technology represents an opportunity to deliver practical solutions for people affected by cancer at a scale that was previously unimaginable, such as information, appointment monitoring, and improved access to cancer support services. This study aimed to determine whether a smartphone application (app) reduced the unmet needs among people newly diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: A single blind, multisite randomized controlled trial to determine the impact of an app-based, 4-month intervention. Newly diagnosed cancer patients were approached at three health service treatment clinics. RESULTS: Eighty-two people were randomized (intervention; n = 43 and control; n = 39), average age was 59.5 years (SD: 12.9); 71% female; 67% married or in a de facto relationship. At baseline, there were no differences in participants' characteristics between the groups. No significant effects, in reducing unmet needs, were demonstrated at the end of intervention (4-month) or 12-month follow-up. Overall, 94% used the app in weeks 1-4, which decreased to 41% in weeks 13-16. Mean app use time per participant: Cancer Information, 6.9 (SD: 18.9) minutes; Appointment Schedule, 5.1 (SD: 9.6) minutes; Cancer Services 1.5 minutes (SD: 6.8); Hospital Navigation, 1.4 (SD: 2.8) minutes. CONCLUSIONS: Despite consumer involvement in the design of this smartphone technology, the app did not reduce unmet needs. This may have been due to the study being underpowered. To contribute to a meaningful understanding and improved implementation of smartphone technology to support people affected by cancer, practical considerations, such as recruitment issues and access to, and confidence with, apps, need to be considered. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registration (ACTRN) Trial Registration: 12616001251415; WEF 7/9/2016.

Measuring cancer caregiver health literacy: Validation of the Health Literacy of Caregivers Scale-Cancer (HLCS-C) in an Australian population.

Caregivers have been largely neglected in health literacy measurement. We assess the construct validity, and internal consistency of the Health Literacy of Caregivers Scale-Cancer (HLCS-C), and present a revised, psychometrically robust scale. Using data from 297 cancer caregivers (12.4% response rate) recruited from Melbourne, Australia between January-July 2014, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to evaluate the HLCS-C's proposed factor structure. Items were evaluated for: item difficulty, unidimensionality and overall item fit within their domain. Item-threshold-ordering was examined though one-parameter Item Response Theory models. Internal consistency was assessed using Raykov's reliability coefficient. CFA results identified 42 poorly performing/redundant items which were subsequently removed. A 10-factor model was fitted to 46 acceptable items with no correlated residuals or factor cross-loadings accepted. Adequate fit was revealed (χ2WLSMV  = 1463.807[df = 944], p < .001, RMSEA = 0.043, CFI = 0.980, TLI = 0.978, WRMR = 1.00). Ten domains were identified: Proactivity and determination to seek information; Adequate information about cancer and cancer management; Supported by healthcare providers (HCP) to understand information; Social support; Cancer-related communication with the care recipient (CR); Understanding CR needs and preferences; Self-care; Understanding the healthcare system; Capacity to process health information; and Active engagement with HCP. Internal consistency was adequate across domains (0.78-0.92). The revised HLCS-C demonstrated good structural, convergent, and discriminant validity, and high internal consistency. The scale may be useful for the development and evaluation of caregiver interventions.

A prospective cohort study of the effects of adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy on taste function, food liking, appetite and associated nutritional outcomes.

BACKGROUND: 'Taste' changes are commonly reported during chemotherapy. It is unclear to what extent this relates to actual changes in taste function or to changes in appetite and food liking and how these changes affect dietary intake and nutritional status. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, repeated measures cohort study recruited participants from three oncology clinics. Women (n = 52) prescribed adjuvant chemotherapy underwent standardised testing of taste perception, appetite and food liking at six time points to measure change from baseline. Associations between taste and hedonic changes and nutritional outcomes were examined. RESULTS: Taste function was significantly reduced early in chemotherapy cycles (p<0.05) but showed recovery by late in the cycle. Ability to correctly identify salty, sour and umami tastants was reduced. Liking of sweet food decreased early and mid-cycle (p<0.01) but not late cycle. Liking of savory food was not significantly affected. Appetite decreased early in the cycle (p<0.001). Reduced taste function was associated with lowest kilojoule intake (r = 0.31; p = 0.008) as was appetite loss with reduced kilojoule (r = 0.34; p = 0.002) and protein intake (r = 0.36; p = 0.001) early in the third chemotherapy cycle. Decreased appetite early in the third and final chemotherapy cycles was associated with a decline in BMI (p = <0.0005) over the study period. Resolution of taste function, food liking and appetite was observed 8 weeks after chemotherapy completion. There was no association between taste change and dry mouth, oral mucositis or nausea. CONCLUSION: The results reveal, for the first time, the cyclical yet transient effects of adjuvant chemotherapy on taste function and the link between taste and hedonic changes, dietary intake and nutritional outcomes. The results should be used to inform reliable pre-chemotherapy education.