scholarly journals Patient feedback and duration of treatment: A corpus-based analysis of written comments on cancer care in England

2021 ◽  
pp. 100010
Author(s):  
Gavin Brookes ◽  
Paul Baker
2020 ◽  
pp. 947-957
Author(s):  
Ethan Basch ◽  
Angela M. Stover ◽  
Deborah Schrag ◽  
Arlene Chung ◽  
Jennifer Jansen ◽  
...  

PURPOSE There is increasing interest in implementing digital systems for remote monitoring of patients’ symptoms during routine oncology practice. Information is limited about the clinical utility and user perceptions of these systems. METHODS PRO-TECT is a multicenter trial evaluating implementation of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) among adults with advanced and metastatic cancers receiving treatment at US community oncology practices (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03249090 ). Questions derived from the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) are administered weekly by web or automated telephone system, with alerts to nurses for severe or worsening symptoms. To elicit user feedback, surveys were administered to participating patients and clinicians. RESULTS Among 496 patients across 26 practices, the majority found the system and questions easy to understand (95%), easy to use (93%), and relevant to their care (91%). Most patients reported that PRO information was used by their clinicians for care (70%), improved discussions with clinicians (73%), made them feel more in control of their own care (77%), and would recommend the system to other patients (89%). Scores for most patient feedback questions were significantly positively correlated with weekly PRO completion rates in both univariate and multivariable analyses. Among 57 nurses, most reported that PRO information was helpful for clinical documentation (79%), increased efficiency of patient discussions (84%), and was useful for patient care (75%). Among 39 oncologists, most found PRO information useful (91%), with 65% using PROs to guide patient discussions sometimes or often and 65% using PROs to make treatment decisions sometimes or often. CONCLUSION These findings support the clinical utility and value of implementing digital systems for monitoring PROs, including the PRO-CTCAE, in routine cancer care.


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 2109-2130
Author(s):  
Lauren Bislick

Purpose This study continued Phase I investigation of a modified Phonomotor Treatment (PMT) Program on motor planning in two individuals with apraxia of speech (AOS) and aphasia and, with support from prior work, refined Phase I methodology for treatment intensity and duration, a measure of communicative participation, and the use of effect size benchmarks specific to AOS. Method A single-case experimental design with multiple baselines across behaviors and participants was used to examine acquisition, generalization, and maintenance of treatment effects 8–10 weeks posttreatment. Treatment was distributed 3 days a week, and duration of treatment was specific to each participant (criterion based). Experimental stimuli consisted of target sounds or clusters embedded nonwords and real words, specific to each participants' deficit. Results Findings show improved repetition accuracy for targets in trained nonwords, generalization to targets in untrained nonwords and real words, and maintenance of treatment effects at 10 weeks posttreatment for one participant and more variable outcomes for the other participant. Conclusions Results indicate that a modified version of PMT can promote generalization and maintenance of treatment gains for trained speech targets via a multimodal approach emphasizing repeated exposure and practice. While these results are promising, the frequent co-occurrence of AOS and aphasia warrants a treatment that addresses both motor planning and linguistic deficits. Thus, the application of traditional PMT with participant-specific modifications for AOS embedded into the treatment program may be a more effective approach. Future work will continue to examine and maximize improvements in motor planning, while also treating anomia in aphasia.


1998 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
McILLMURRAY ◽  
CUMMINGS ◽  
HOPKINS ◽  
McCANN
Keyword(s):  

2007 ◽  
Vol 177 (4S) ◽  
pp. 67-67
Author(s):  
David C. Miller ◽  
Laura Baybridge ◽  
Lorna C. Kwan ◽  
Ronald Andersen ◽  
Lillian Gelberg ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 175 (4S) ◽  
pp. 66-67
Author(s):  
Charles L. Bennett ◽  
Oliver Sartor ◽  
Susan Halabi ◽  
Michael W. Kattan ◽  
Peter T. Scardino

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document