Cancer Patients’ Perceptions of the Barriers and Facilitators to Patient Participation in Symptom Management During an Episode of Admission

2015 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 458-465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Cohen ◽  
Mari Botti
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juqing Zhao ◽  
Pei Chen ◽  
Guangming Wan

BACKGROUND There has been an increase number of eHealth and mHealth interventions aimed to support symptoms among cancer survivors. However, patient engagement has not been guaranteed and standardized in these interventions. OBJECTIVE The objective of this review was to address how patient engagement has been defined and measured in eHealth and mHealth interventions designed to improve symptoms and quality of life for cancer patients. METHODS Searches were performed in MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to identify eHealth and mHealth interventions designed specifically to improve symptom management for cancer patients. Definition and measurement of engagement and engagement related outcomes of each intervention were synthesized. This integrated review was conducted using Critical Interpretive Synthesis to ensure the quality of data synthesis. RESULTS A total of 792 intervention studies were identified through the searches; 10 research papers met the inclusion criteria. Most of them (6/10) were randomized trial, 2 were one group trail, 1 was qualitative design, and 1 paper used mixed method. Majority of identified papers defined patient engagement as the usage of an eHealth and mHealth intervention by using different variables (e.g., usage time, log in times, participation rate). Engagement has also been described as subjective experience about the interaction with the intervention. The measurement of engagement is in accordance with the definition of engagement and can be categorized as objective and subjective measures. Among identified papers, 5 used system usage data, 2 used self-reported questionnaire, 1 used sensor data and 3 used qualitative method. Almost all studies reported engagement at a moment to moment level, but there is a lack of measurement of engagement for the long term. CONCLUSIONS There have been calls to develop standard definition and measurement of patient engagement in eHealth and mHealth interventions. Besides, it is important to provide cancer patients with more tailored and engaging eHealth and mHealth interventions for long term engagement.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S199-S200
Author(s):  
Olivia Kates ◽  
Elizabeth M Krantz ◽  
Juhye Lee ◽  
John Klaassen ◽  
Jessica Morris ◽  
...  

Abstract Background IDSA/SHEA guidelines recommend that antimicrobial stewardship programs support providers in antibiotic decisions for end of life care. Washington State Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) forms allow patients to indicate antimicrobial use preferences. We sought to characterize antimicrobial use in the last 30 days of life for cancer patients by presence of a POLST and antimicrobial use preferences. Methods We performed a single-center, retrospective cohort study of cancer patient deaths from January 1, 2016 - June 30, 3018. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, POLST, and antimicrobial use within 30 days before death were extracted from electronic records. To test for an association between POLST completed at least 30 days before death and inpatient antimicrobial days of therapy (DOT) in the 30 days before death, we used negative binomial models adjusted for age, sex, race, and service line (hematologic versus solid malignancy); model estimates are presented as incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) Results Of 1796 patients, 406 (23%) had a POLST. 177/406 (44%) were completed less than 30 days before death, and 58/177 (32.8%) specified limited antibiotic use; 40/177 (23%) did not specify any antimicrobial use preference (Fig 1). Of 1295 patients with at least 1 inpatient day in the 30 days before death, 1070 (83%) received at least 1 inpatient antimicrobial with median DOT of 1077 per 1000 inpatient days (Tab 1). There was no difference in DOT among patients with and without a POLST > /= 30 days before death (IRR 0.92, CI 0.77, 1.10). Patients with a POLST specifying limited antibiotic use had significantly lower inpatient IV antimicrobial DOT compared to those without a POLST (IRR 0.64, CI 0.42–0.97) (Fig 2). Figure 1. Classification of Patients by Presence of POLST, Timing, and Antimicrobial Preference Content of POLST. Numbers shown represent the number of patients (percentage). Full antibiotic use refers to the selection “Use antibiotics for prolongation of life.” Limited antibiotic use refers to the selection “Do not use antibiotics except when needed for symptom management.” Table 1: Antimicrobial use for all patients and by advance directive group Figure 2. Forest plot of model estimates, represented as incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), for associations between POLST antimicrobial specifications completed at least 30 days before death and inpatient antibiotic days of therapy (DOT) in the 30 days before death. Estimates represent comparisons between each POLST category and no POLST completed at least 30 days before death. Dots represent the IRR and brackets extend to the lower and upper limit of the 95% CI. Blue estimates are for the inpatient antibiotic DOT outcome and red estimates are for the inpatient IV antibiotic DOT outcome. Conclusion POLST completion is rare > /= 30 days before death, with few POLSTs specifying antimicrobial use. Compared to those with no POLST in this time frame, patients who indicated that antibiotics should be used only for symptom management received significantly fewer inpatient IV antimicrobials. Early discussion of advance directives including POLST with specification of antimicrobial use preferences may promote more thoughtful use of antimicrobials near the end of life in a compassionate, patient-centered way. Disclosures Steven A. Pergam, MD, MPH, Chimerix, Inc (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Global Life Technologies, Inc. (Research Grant or Support)Merck & Co. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Sanofi-Aventis (Other Financial or Material Support, Participate in clinical trial sponsored by NIAID (U01-AI132004); vaccines for this trial are provided by Sanofi-Aventis)


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Nida Gizem Yılmaz ◽  
Hande Sungur ◽  
Julia C.M. van Weert ◽  
Maria E.T.C. van den Muijsenbergh ◽  
Barbara C. Schouten

2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 377-378
Author(s):  
Anne Walling ◽  
Jane Weeks ◽  
Katherine Kahn ◽  
Diana Tisnado ◽  
Nancy Keating ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Sharyn Carrasco, PhD, RN

Background: The purpose of this descriptive phenomenological study was to gain an in-depth understanding of cancer patients’ experiences and perspectives on self-reporting their symptoms. Patients with cancer experience a wide variety of symptoms from both their disease and treatment, yet clinicians are often unaware of their patients’ symptoms due to poor reporting methods. Poorly documented symptoms are more likely to go untreated, causing increased symptom distress and decreased quality of life for patients. Effective, real-time communication between patients and health-care practitioners is key to symptom assessment and management. Moreover, it is important for patients’ communication preferences to be taken into account when developing symptom management plans. Methods: This qualitative study focused on the symptom reporting experiences of 13 adults in the United States with advanced or metastatic cancer who were undergoing systemic cancer treatment. Data were collected via interviews. Results: The findings revealed that a personalized symptom management plan, prompt reporting, and timely communication with health-care practitioners improved patients’ physical and emotional wellbeing. Conclusions: A better understanding of cancer patients’ experiences self-reporting their symptoms may lead to improved communication methods and more effective reporting systems, which ultimately reduce patient burden and enhance patients’ self-advocacy. Ensuring that patients’ preferences for reporting their symptoms are met may positively influence the likelihood and timeliness of symptom self-reporting. Developing new and improved ways for health-care teams to manage symptoms is vital to improving patients’ quality of life.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document