A qualitative analysis of algorithm-based decision support usability testing for symptom management across the trajectory of cancer care: one size does not fit all.

BACKGROUND: Adults with cancer experience symptoms that change across the disease trajectory. Due to the distress and cost associated with uncontrolled symptoms, improving symptom management is an important component of quality cancer care. Clinical decision support (CDS) is a promising strategy to integrate clinical practice guideline (CPG)-based symptom management recommendations at the point of care. METHODS: The objectives of this project were to develop and evaluate the usability of two symptom management algorithms (constipation and fatigue) across the trajectory of cancer care in patients with active disease treated in comprehensive or community cancer care settings to surveillance of cancer survivors in primary care practices. A modified ADAPTE process was used to develop algorithms based on national CPGs. Usability testing involved semi-structured interviews with clinicians from varied care settings, including comprehensive and community cancer centers, and primary care. The transcripts were analyzed with MAXQDA using Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis method. A cross tabs analysis was also performed to assess the prevalence of themes and subthemes by cancer care setting. RESULTS: A total of 17 clinicians (physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants) were interviewed for usability testing. Three main themes emerged: (1) Algorithms as useful, (2) Symptom management differences, and (3) Different target end-users. The cross-tabs analysis demonstrated differences among care trajectories and settings that originated in the Symptom management differences theme. The sub-themes of "Differences between diseases" and "Differences between care trajectories" originated from participants working in a comprehensive cancer center, which tends to be disease-specific locations for patients on active treatment. Meanwhile, participants from primary care identified the sub-theme of "Differences in settings," indicating that symptom management strategies are care setting specific. CONCLUSIONS: While CDS can help promote evidence-based symptom management, systems providing care recommendations need to be specifically developed to fit patient characteristics and clinical context. Findings suggest that one set of algorithms will not be applicable throughout the entire cancer trajectory. Unique CDS for symptom management will be needed for patients who are cancer survivors being followed in primary care settings.

Designing a Dyad-Based Digital Health Intervention to Reduce Sedentary Time in Black Breast Cancer Survivors and Their First-degree Relatives: Human-Centered Design Study.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer, the most commonly diagnosed cancer and second leading cause of cancer-related death in women in the United States, disproportionately affects women from minoritized or low socioeconomic backgrounds. The average woman has an approximately 12% lifetime risk of developing breast cancer. Lifetime risk nearly doubles if a woman has a first-degree relative with breast cancer, and the risk increases as multiple family members are affected. Decreasing sedentary behaviors through moving more and sitting less reduces breast cancer risk and improves outcomes for cancer survivors and healthy adults. Digital health solutions, such as mobile apps that are culturally appropriate, designed with input from the target audience, and include social support, are effective at improving health behaviors. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and evaluate the usability and acceptability of a prototype app designed with a human-centered approach to promote moving more and sitting less in Black breast cancer survivors and their first-degree relatives (parent, child, or sibling). METHODS: This 3-phase study consisted of app development, user testing, and evaluation of user engagement and usability. Key community stakeholders were engaged in the first 2 (qualitative) phases to provide input into developing the prototype app (MoveTogether). After development and user testing, a usability pilot was conducted. Participants were adult breast cancer survivors who identified as Black and agreed to participate with a relative. Participants used the app and a step-tracking watch for 4 weeks. App components included goal setting and reporting, reminders, dyad messaging, and educational resources. Usability and acceptability were assessed with a questionnaire that included the System Usability Scale (SUS) and semistructured interviews. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and content analysis. RESULTS: Participants in the usability pilot (n=10) were aged 30 to 50 years (6/10, 60%), not married (8/10, 80%), and college graduates (5/10, 50%). The app was used on average 20.2 (SD 8.9) out of 28 days-SUS score of 72 (range 55-95)-and 70% (7/10) agreed that the app was acceptable, helpful, and gave them new ideas. Additionally, 90% (9/10) found the dyad component helpful and would recommend the app to friends. Qualitative findings suggest that the goal-setting feature was helpful and that the dyad partner (buddy) provided accountability. Participants were neutral regarding the cultural appropriateness of the app. CONCLUSIONS: The MoveTogether app and related components were acceptable for promoting moving more in dyads of breast cancer survivors and their first-degree relatives. The human-centered approach, which involved engaging community members in the development, is a model for future technology development work. Future work should be done to further develop the intervention based on the findings and then test its efficacy to improve sedentary behavior while considering culturally informed strategies for adoption and implementation within the community. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05011279; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05011279.

Concordance between influential adverse treatment outcomes and localized prostate cancer treatment decisions.

BACKGROUND: Although treatment decisions for localized prostate cancer (LPC) are preference-sensitive, the extent to which individuals with LPC receive preference-concordant treatment is unclear. In a sample of individuals with LPC, the purpose of this study was to (a) assess concordance between the influence of potential adverse treatment outcomes and treatment choice; (b) determine whether receipt of a decision aid predicts higher odds of concordance; and (c) identify predictors of concordance from a set of participant characteristics and influential personal factors. METHODS: Participants reported the influence of potential adverse treatment outcomes and personal factors on treatment decisions at baseline. Preference-concordant treatment was defined as (a) any treatment if risk of adverse outcomes did not have a lot of influence, (b) active surveillance if risk of adverse outcomes had a lot of influence, or (c) radical prostatectomy or active surveillance if risk of adverse bowel outcomes had a lot of influence and risk of other adverse outcomes did not have a lot of influence. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 224 participants, 137 (61%) pursued treatment concordant with preferences related to adverse treatment outcomes. Receipt of a decision aid did not predict higher odds of concordance. Low tumor risk and age ≥ 60 years predicted higher odds of concordance, while attributing a lot of influence to the impact of treatment on recreation predicted lower odds of concordance. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of potential adverse treatment outcomes may not be the foremost consideration of some patients with LPC. Assessment of the relative importance of patients' stated values and preferences is warranted in the setting of LPC treatment decision making. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01844999 ( www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ).

Clinical Decision Support for Symptom Management in Lung Cancer Patients: A Group RCT.

CONTEXT: Clinical guidelines are available to enhance symptom management during cancer treatment but often are not used in the practice setting. Clinical decision support can facilitate the implementation and adherence to clinical guidelines. and improve the quality of cancer care. OBJECTIVES: Clinical decision support offers an innovative approach to integrate guideline-based symptom management into oncology care. This study evaluated the effect of clinical decision support-based recommendations on clinical management of symptoms and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) among outpatients with lung cancer. METHODS: Twenty providers and 179 patients were allotted in group randomization to attention control (AC) or Symptom Assessment and Management Intervention (SAMI) arms. SAMI entailed patient-report of symptoms and delivery of recommendations to manage pain, fatigue, dyspnea, depression, and anxiety; AC entailed symptom reporting prior to the visit. Outcomes were collected at baseline, two, four and six-months. Adherence to recommendations was assessed through masked chart review. HR-QOL was measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung questionnaire. Descriptive statistics with linear and logistic regression accounting for the clustering structure of the design and a modified chi-square test were used for analyses. RESULTS: Median age of patients was 63 years, 58% female, 88% white, and 32% ≤high school education. Significant differences in clinical management were evident in SAMI vs. AC for all target symptoms that passed threshold. Patients in SAMI were more likely to receive sustained-release opioids for constant pain, adjuvant medications for neuropathic pain, opioids for dyspnea, stimulants for fatigue and mental health referrals for anxiety. However, there were no statistically significant differences in HR-QOL at any time point. CONCLUSION: SAMI improved clinical management for all target symptoms but did not improve patient outcomes. A larger study is warranted to evaluate effectiveness.

What's Lost in Translation: A Dialogue-Based Intervention That Improves Interpreter Confidence in Palliative Care Conversations.

BACKGROUND: For US patients with limited English proficiency (LEP), diversity of language and culture can create potential health care disparities in discussions of prognosis and goals of care. Although professional medical interpreters are often thought of as language conduits, they are also trained as clarifiers and mediators of cultural barriers between providers, patients and their families. Identifying interpreter challenges in Palliative Care (PC) conversations and brainstorming and rehearsing solutions could improve their confidence interpreting PC encounters and being cultural mediators. MEASURES: Pre- and Pre/Postintervention PC confidence questionnaires. INTERVENTION: six-session monthly dialogue-based course. OUTCOMES: Interpreters showed significant increases in postintervention confidence in PC communication compared with pre-intervention (z = -5.646, P< 0.000). CONCLUSIONS/LESSONS LEARNED: This dialogue-based intervention eliciting ongoing interpreter challenges, with PC social work facilitation and role-play with PC clinicians in a mutually respectful environment, significantly improved interpreter confidence in partnering with clinicians in PC conversations.

Decision regret, adverse outcomes, and treatment choice in men with localized prostate cancer: Results from a multi-site randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION: Men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer must navigate a highly preference-sensitive decision between treatment options with varying adverse outcome profiles. We evaluated whether use of a decision support tool previously shown to decrease decisional conflict also impacted the secondary outcome of post-treatment decision regret. METHODS: Participants were randomized to receive personalized decision support via the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate or usual care prior to a final treatment decision. Symptoms were measured just before randomization and 6 months later; decision regret was measured at 6 months along with records review to ascertain treatment choices. Regression modeling explored associations between baseline variables including race and D`Amico risk, study group, and 6-month variables regret, choice, and symptoms. RESULTS: At 6 months, 287 of 392 (73%) men returned questionnaires of which 257 (89%) had made a treatment choice. Of that group, 201 of 257 (78%) completely answered the regret scale. Regret was not significantly different between participants randomized to the P3P intervention compared to the control group (P = 0.360). In univariate analyses, we found that Black men, men with hormonal symptoms, and men with bowel symptoms reported significantly higher decision regret (all P < 0.01). Significant interactions were detected between race and study group (intervention vs. usual care) in the multivariable model; use of the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate was associated with significantly decreased decisional regret among Black men (P = 0.037). Interactions between regret, symptoms and treatment revealed that (1) men choosing definitive treatment and reporting no hormonal symptoms reported lower regret compared to all others; and (2) men choosing active surveillance and reporting bowel symptoms had higher regret compared to all others. CONCLUSION: The Personal Patient Profile-Prostate decision support tool may be most beneficial in minimizing decisional regret for Black men considering treatment options for newly-diagnosed prostate cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01844999.

Decision support for men with prostate cancer: Concordance between treatment choice and tumor risk.

BACKGROUND: Decision support tools improve decisional conflict and elicit patient preferences related to prostate cancer treatment. It was hypothesized that men using the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P) would be more likely to pursue guideline-concordant treatment. METHODS: Men from a trial assessing the P3P decision support intervention were identified. The primary exposure was allocation to P3P (vs usual care), and the outcome was appropriate treatment per guidelines (eg, low risk = active surveillance). It was assessed whether providers recommended against any treatment options (ie, restricted). A multivariable model was fit for men with low-risk cancer that estimated the odds of the outcome of interest. RESULTS: This study identified 295 men in the cohort: 113 (38%) had low-risk disease, 119 (40%) had favorable intermediate-risk disease, and 63 (21%) had unfavorable intermediate-risk disease. Among low-risk patients, more men pursued active surveillance after using P3P whether they were given unrestricted (62% vs 54% with usual care; P = .54) or restricted options (71% vs 59% with usual care; P = .34). After adjustments, only Black race (odds ratio [OR], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.89) and restricted options (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.08-0.65) had an inverse association with the receipt of surveillance for patients with low-risk prostate cancer. An impact associated with P3P versus usual care (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.36-2.20) was not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Among men in a trial assessing a decision support tool, Black race and restricted treatment options were associated with less use of active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer. Although the P3P instrument ameliorates decisional conflict, its use was not associated with more appropriate alignment of treatment with disease risk.

Racial/ethnicity differences in endorsing influential factors for prostate cancer treatment choice: An analysis of data from the personal patient profile-prostate (P3P) I and II trials.

OBJECTIVE: Rates and choice of treatment for localized prostate cancer vary according to race/ethnicity in American men. We hypothesized that there were group differences in influential values and preferences related to treatment decisions. METHODS: We analyzed samples from 2 multicenter, randomized trials of the Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P) I and II decision aid, first comparing the groups on other demographic and decisional variables using Chi-square tests. Stratified (P3P I vs. II) logistic regression was then used to assess the univariate association between race/ethnicity and endorsement of moderate-or-strong influence of 14 lifestyle factors, current or future symptoms, or important others on the decision. A multivariable stratified logistic regression with backward variable selection was used to further estimate the association between influential factors and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: There were 494 and 392 participants in P3P I and P3P II, respectively, with 40 Hispanic, 168 non-Hispanic black, 637 non-Hispanic white, 19 others and 6 missing. Age (P = 0.0001), education (P < 0.0001), marital status (P < 0.0001), income (P < 0.0001), Internet use for information (P < 0.0001) and decisional control preference were significantly different across racial/ethnic groups. In adjusted analyses, we saw racial/ethnic differences in the decisional influence of age (Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) vs. Non-Hispanic White (NHW) OR: 0.56 95%CI 0.38-0.85 P = 0.002), religion/spirituality (NHB vs. NHW OR: 3.2095%CI1.95-5.26, P < 0.0001), future bladder function (NHB vs. NHW OR: 0.5795%CI 0.35-0.90, P = 0.04), future ability to engage in recreation (NHB vs. NHW OR: 0.5495%CI 0.34-0.86, P = 0.02), and a story of a famous person with prostate cancer (NHB vs. NHW OR: 2,11 95%CI 1.30-3.43, P = 0.007). No interactions were found. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest racial/ethnic differences for influences underlying treatment choice. Better understanding these influences may help us present salient information about treatment options to patients and address disparities.

The Jacki Jacket after mastectomy with reconstruction: a randomized pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy with reconstruction (TM + R) often experience post-operative discomfort from surgical drains. Despite a variety of garment options for use in the post-operative period, high-quality data assessing the impact of specific garments on post-operative pain are lacking. We report the results of a prospective randomized trial assessing the impact of the Jacki Jacket (JJ), a long-sleeve jacket with inner drain receptacle pockets, on post-discharge pain and quality of life (QOL) after TM + R. METHODS: Breast cancer patients undergoing TM + R at a single institution were randomized post-operatively to receive a JJ or usual care (UC). Participant-reported demographics, pain intensity, and QOL were collected on post-operative day 1 (T1). Following discharge, participants completed a daily pain and medication dairy (T2); on day of drain(s) removal (T3), participants again completed pain and QOL questionnaires. Linear models were used to evaluate associations between JJ use, post-operative pain, and QOL. RESULTS: From 3/8/17 to 12/20/17, 139 women were randomized. All participants completed T1 measures, 102 returned the T2 diary, and 118 (84.9%) completed T3 questionnaires. There was no significant difference in pain scores between JJ and UC arms at any timepoint. Adjusting for surgery type, age, marital status, depression, and obesity, participants randomized to JJ reported significantly better body image scores (estimate = 12.94, p = 0.009). There were no adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Although JJ garment use did not impact post-operative pain intensity scores, the significant impact of JJ use on body image supports consideration for inclusion of such garments in post-operative care for patients undergoing TM + R. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT number NCT02976103, November 18, 2016.

Correction to: Exploring the efficacy of an electronic symptom assessment and self-care intervention to preserve physical function in individuals receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy.

...

Assigning value to preparation for prostate cancer decision making: a willingness to pay analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Personal Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P) is a web-based decision support system for men newly diagnosed with localized prostate cancer that has demonstrated efficacy in reducing decisional conflict. Our objective was to estimate willingness-to-pay (WTP) for men's decisional preparation activities. METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized trial of P3P, usual care group participants received typical preparation for decision making plus referral to publicly-available, educational websites. Intervention group participants received the same, plus online P3P educational media specific to the user's personal preferences and values, and a communication coaching component tailored to race\ethnicity, age and language. WTP data were collected one week after physician consultation. An iterative bidding direct contingent valuation survey format was used, randomly assigning participants to high or low starting values (SV). Tobit models were used to explore associations between SV-adjusted WTP and age, education, marital and work-status, insurance, decision-control preference and decision-making stage. RESULTS: Of 392 participants enrolled, 141 P3P and 107 usual care (UC) provided a WTP value. Men were willing to pay a median $25 (IQR $10-100) for P3P in addition to usual care preparation materials. In the final multivariable tobit regression model, SV, marital status, stage of decision making and income were significantly associated with WTP for P3P. Decision control preference was considered marginally significant (p = 0.11). Men were WTP a median $30 (IQR $10-$200) for usual care material alone. In the final multivariable model, SV, education, and stage of decision making were significantly associated with WTP in usual care. CONCLUSION: WTP was similar for UC and for the addition of P3P to UC decision preparation. The WTP values were associated with demographic and preference variables. Findings can help focus decision support on future patients who would benefit most: those without strong support systems, at earlier stages of decision making, and open to a shared-decision style. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT NCT01844999 . Registered May 3, 2013.

Evaluating Clinical Implementation Approaches for Prostate Cancer Decision Support.

INTRODUCTION: Shared decision making is widely promoted for counseling men with localized prostate cancer. Results of randomized trials suggest decision aid efficacy. However, few practices or institutions have implemented decision support as standard practice. In this study we evaluated various implementation strategies for the decision aid P3P (Personal Patient Profile-Prostate) and analyzed feedback from clinical site staff and providers. METHODS: A hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial was conducted. Primary data were collected in 6 urology clinics of 3 geographically distinct health networks. During the implementation phase site specific strategies were codesigned with site leaders. Referral and access metrics for men with localized prostate cancer were monitored for up to 7 months. Clinical staff reports of barriers and facilitators of implementation were evaluated in professionally facilitated focus groups. RESULTS: Of 495 men with localized prostate cancer seen in the clinics 252 (51%, 95% CI 46-55) were informed of the program and of those men 107 (43%, 95% CI 36-49) accessed it. The highest access rates were observed with patient care coordinator e-mail and telephone contact (82%) or verbal physician instruction followed by e-mail and telephone invitations (87%). During focus groups physicians appraised the summaries as useful. Staff identified barriers included creating new workflows within heavy workloads and staff misunderstanding of context and resources. Promoters of successful implementation included an identified clinical lead and physician engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation success was realized when physicians engaged and staff provided followup contact. New practice changes to implement interventions require multimodal strategies for early success.

Exploring the efficacy of an electronic symptom assessment and self-care intervention to preserve physical function in individuals receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Impaired physical function due to chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) symptoms may lead to diminished quality of life. However, even with the knowledge of the effects of CIPN on physical function, clinicians infrequently assess and manage CIPN. Interventions that prioritize the early identification of CIPN to provide prompt treatment may reduce the impact of CIPN on physical function. The purpose of this paper is to compare self-reported physical function in individuals receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy between Electronic Symptom Assessment-Cancer (ESRA-C) intervention group (e.g., opportunity for symptom screening, self-care recommendations, communication coaching, and symptom tracking) and control group participants (i.e., electronic assessment alone). Secondary outcomes include pain intensity, sensory/motor CIPN, depression, fatigue, and insomnia. METHODS: The data used in this paper are a subset of a randomized controlled trial that examined the impact of the ESRA-C intervention on symptom distress in individuals receiving cancer treatment. Since the interest in this analysis is on the effects of neurotoxic chemotherapy on physical function, subjects were included if they received platinum and/or taxane-based chemotherapy and completed the baseline and end-of-treatment measures. Participants completed standardized questionnaires of physical function, CIPN, fatigue, depression, pain intensity, and insomnia prior to treatment, 3-6 weeks after treatment initiation, and after the completion of treatment. Changes in mean scores are compared between groups using linear mixed models adjusting for age. RESULTS: Intervention group participants reported significantly less reduction in physical functioning (baseline: 87.4/100; end-of-treatment: 84.5/100) relative to the control (baseline: 90.2/100; end-of-treatment: 81.8/100) (p = 0.011). For secondary measures, significantly less depression (p = 0.005) was observed in the intervention group as compared to the control, but otherwise, there were no between-group differences. Among participants who received high cumulative doses of neurotoxic chemotherapy, the intervention group reported significantly less severe sensory (p = 0.007) and motor CIPN (p = 0.039) relative to the control. CONCLUSION: Use of the ESRA-C intervention led to less reduction in physical function in comparison to the control in individuals receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy. Further research is needed to confirm our findings and to identify how electronic symptom assessment technology may mediate physical function preservation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT00852852 . Registered 27 February 2009.

Decision Support with the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate: A Multicenter Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the efficacy of the web based P3P (Personal Patient Profile-Prostate) decision aid vs usual care with regard to decisional conflict in men with localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized (1:1), controlled, parallel group, nonblinded trial was performed in 4 regions of the United States. Eligible men had clinically localized prostate cancer and an upcoming consultation, and they spoke and read English or Spanish. Participants answered questionnaires to report decision making stage, personal characteristics, concerns and preferences plus baseline symptoms and decisional conflict. A randomization algorithm allocated participants to receive tailored education and communication coaching, generic teaching sheets and external websites plus a 1-page summary to clinicians (intervention) or the links plus materials provided in clinic (usual care). Conflict outcomes and the number of consultations were measured at 1 month. Univariate and multivariable models were used to analyze outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 392 men were randomized, including 198 to intervention and 194 to usual care, of whom 152 and 153, respectively, returned 1-month outcomes. The mean ± SD 1-month decisional conflict scale (score range 0 to 100) was 10.9 ± 16.7 for intervention and 9.9 ± 18.0 for usual care. The multivariable model revealed significantly reduced conflict in the intervention group (-5.00, 95% CI -9.40--0.59). Other predictors of conflict included income, marital or partner status, decision status, number of consultations, clinical site and D'Amico risk classification. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter trial the decision aid significantly reduced decisional conflict. Other variables impacted conflict and modified the effect of the decision aid, notably risk classification, consultations and resources. P3P is an effective adjunct for shared decision making in men with localized prostate cancer.

Psychosocial outcomes of an electronic self-report assessment and self-care intervention for patients with cancer: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of Web-based technology to facilitate self-care and communication with health care providers has the potential to improve psychosocial outcomes for patients undergoing cancer treatment. This study reports an analysis of psychosocial outcomes of the electronic self-report assessment for cancer study. METHODS: Adult patients starting cancer therapy were randomized to receive usual education about symptoms and quality of life topics (control) or usual education plus self-care instruction for symptoms and quality of life issues, communication coaching, and the opportunity to track symptoms and quality of life between clinic visits (intervention). Depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9) and social, emotional, and role functioning (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 subscales) were measured before treatment (T1), 3 to 6 weeks after starting treatment (T2), 2 weeks later (T3), and 2 to 4 weeks after treatment ended or at the next restaging visit for participants who continued to receive treatment (T4). Clinicians received summaries of participant reports at each time point in both groups. RESULTS: In multivariable analysis, the depression scores were significantly lower (P = .04) and there was a trend to higher social and role functioning (P = .07) in the intervention group compared with the control. Working status was significantly associated with lower depression and better social and role functioning. CONCLUSIONS: A patient-centered, Web-based intervention that facilitates self-care and communication can improve psychosocial outcomes in the cancer setting.

Increasing Complexity in Rule-Based Clinical Decision Support: The Symptom Assessment and Management Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Management of uncontrolled symptoms is an important component of quality cancer care. Clinical guidelines are available for optimal symptom management, but are not often integrated into the front lines of care. The use of clinical decision support (CDS) at the point-of-care is an innovative way to incorporate guideline-based symptom management into routine cancer care. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop and evaluate a rule-based CDS system to enable management of multiple symptoms in lung cancer patients at the point-of-care. METHODS: This study was conducted in three phases involving a formative evaluation, a system evaluation, and a contextual evaluation of clinical use. In Phase 1, we conducted iterative usability testing of user interface prototypes with patients and health care providers (HCPs) in two thoracic oncology clinics. In Phase 2, we programmed complex algorithms derived from clinical practice guidelines into a rules engine that used Web services to communicate with the end-user application. Unit testing of algorithms was conducted using a stack-traversal tree-spanning methodology to identify all possible permutations of pathways through each algorithm, to validate accuracy. In Phase 3, we evaluated clinical use of the system among patients and HCPs in the two clinics via observations, structured interviews, and questionnaires. RESULTS: In Phase 1, 13 patients and 5 HCPs engaged in two rounds of formative testing, and suggested improvements leading to revisions until overall usability scores met a priori benchmarks. In Phase 2, symptom management algorithms contained between 29 and 1425 decision nodes, resulting in 19 to 3194 unique pathways per algorithm. Unit testing required 240 person-hours, and integration testing required 40 person-hours. In Phase 3, both patients and HCPs found the system usable and acceptable, and offered suggestions for improvements. CONCLUSIONS: A rule-based CDS system for complex symptom management was systematically developed and tested. The complexity of the algorithms required extensive development and innovative testing. The Web service-based approach allowed remote access to CDS knowledge, and could enable scaling and sharing of this knowledge to accelerate availability, and reduce duplication of effort. Patients and HCPs found the system to be usable and useful.

Patient-reported symptom distress, and most bothersome issues, before and during cancer treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Frequently reported symptoms and treatment side effects may not be the most bothersome issues to patients with cancer. The purpose of this study was to investigate patient-reported symptom distress and bothersome issues among participants with cancer. METHODS: Participants completed the Symptom Distress Scale-15 before treatment (T1) and during cancer treatment (T2) and reported up to two most bothersome issues among symptoms rated with moderate-to-severe distress. We compared symptom ratings and perceived bother and explored two approaches predicting patients' most bothersome issues: worst absolute symptom score or worst change from pretreatment. RESULTS: Significantly, (P≤0.0002) more patients reported moderate-to-severe distress at T2 for eight of 13 symptoms. At T1, 81% of patients reported one and 56% reported multiple symptoms with moderate-to-severe distress, while at T2, 89% reported one and 69% reported multiple symptoms with moderate-to-severe distress. Impact on sexual activity/interest, pain, fatigue, and insomnia were the most prevalent symptoms with moderate-to-severe distress. Fatigue, pain, and insomnia were perceived most often as bothersome. When one symptom was rated moderate-to-severe, predictive accuracy of the absolute score was 46% and 48% (T1 & T2) and 38% with the change score (T2-T1). When two or more symptoms were rated moderate-to-severe, predictive accuracy of the absolute score was 76% and 79% (T1 & T2) and 70% with the change score (T2-T1). CONCLUSION: More patients experienced moderate-to-severe symptom distress after treatment initiation. Patient identification of bothersome issues could not be assumed based on prevalence of symptoms reported with moderate-to-severe distress. The absolute symptom distress scores identified patients' most bothersome issues with good accuracy, outperforming change scores.

Usability Testing the "Personal Patient Profile-Prostate" in a Sample of African American and Hispanic Men.

Shared treatment decision making in a cancer setting requires a patient's understanding of the potential benefits and risks of each treatment option. Graphical display of risk information is one approach to improving understanding. Little is known about how patients engage with infographics in the context of health education materials and whether interactions vary with health literacy levels. We conducted an observational study, using an eye tracker device, of how men with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer visually engaged with an on-screen infographic depicting risk information in the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate. Health literacy was measured with the Short Assessment of Health Literacy-English. Gaze patterns on an exemplar screens containing infographics about survival were analyzed and explored with respect to sociodemographic and health literacy data. Acceptability of Personal Patient Profile-Prostate was measured with the Acceptability E-scale. Twenty-six English-speaking men participated, and eye tracking data were collected for 12 men on the exemplar page of risk information that we analyzed. We found preliminary evidence of visual scanning and of participants with lower literacy focusing sooner on infographics versus text. Acceptability for Personal Patient Profile-Prostate was high. These findings suggest that infographics may be of higher relative value to participants with low health literacy. Eye trackers may provide valuable information on how people visually engage with infographics and may inform development of health education materials, although care must be taken to minimize data loss.

Self-reported adherence to oral cancer therapy: relationships with symptom distress, depression, and personal characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic cancer chemotherapy is most successful when complete dosing is achieved. Because many newer therapeutic agents are oral and self-administered by the patient, adherence is a concern. The purpose of our analysis was to explore relationships between adherence, patient characteristics, and barriers to adherence. METHODS: This secondary analysis utilized self-reported data from a randomized trial of self-care management conducted at two cancer centers in the US. Symptom distress was measured using the 15-item Symptom Distress Scale (SDS-15) and depression with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Adherence to oral medication was self-reported using the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8). Measures were collected via Web-based, study-specific software ~8 weeks after treatment start date. Odds of low/medium adherence (score <8) were explored using univariate logistic regression. Given the number of factors and possible relationships among factors, a classification tree was built in lieu of a multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS: Of the eligible participants enrolled, 77 were on oral therapy and 70 had an MMAS score. Forty-nine (70%) reported a high adherence score (=8). Higher odds of low/medium adherence were associated with greater symptom distress (P=0.09), more depression (P=0.05), chemotherapy vs hormonal oral medication (P=0.03), being female (P=0.02), and being randomized to the control group in the parent trial (P=0.09). Conversely, high adherence was associated with working (P=0.08), being married/partnered (P=0.004), and being older (P=0.02). Factors identified as significantly related to low/medium adherence from the univariate logistic regression analyses were supported by the classification tree results. CONCLUSION: Nonadherence to therapeutic oral medications in patients with cancer was associated with being unmarried/unpartnered, symptom distress, younger age, not working, and female sex. These findings may help to identify patients at risk for nonadherence and for whom supportive interventions to enhance adherence may be needed.