» Articles » PMID: 34565193

A Low Literacy, Multimedia Health Information Technology Intervention to Enhance Patient-Centered Cancer Care in Safety Net Settings Increased Cancer Knowledge in a Randomized Controlled Trial

Overview
Journal Cancer Control
Specialty Oncology
Date 2021 Sep 27
PMID 34565193
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

We tested whether a low-literacy-friendly, multimedia information and assessment system used in daily clinical practice enhanced patient-centered care and improved patient outcomes. This was a prospective, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial with 2 arms, CancerHelp-Talking Touchscreen (CancerHelp-TT) versus control, among adults with Stage I-III breast or colorectal cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy in safety net settings. Each patient was assessed for outcomes at 4 timepoints: after starting treatment (baseline), during treatment, immediately after treatment, and at follow-up assessment. The primary outcomes were health beliefs, cancer knowledge, self-efficacy, and satisfaction with communication about cancer and its treatments. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) was a secondary outcome. A total of 129 patients participated in the study (65 intervention and 64 control), and approximately 50% of these completed the study. Patients randomized to receive the CancerHelp-TT program had a significantly larger increase in their cancer knowledge in comparison to those randomized to the control arm (effect size = .48, = .05). While effect sizes for differences between randomized groups in self-efficacy, health beliefs, HRQOL, and satisfaction with communication were small (.10-.48), there was a consistent trend that participants in the intervention group showed larger increases over time in all outcomes compared to the control group. The CancerHelp-TT software was favorably rated by intervention participants. The CancerHelp-TT program showed promise to increase vulnerable cancer patients' cancer knowledge and adaptive health beliefs and attitudes. However, vulnerable patients may need additional interventional support in settings outside cancer clinics.

Citing Articles

Cancer Patients' Perspectives and Requirements of Digital Health Technologies: A Scoping Literature Review.

Lazarou I, Krooupa A, Nikolopoulos S, Apostolidis L, Sarris N, Papadopoulos S Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(13).

PMID: 39001356 PMC: 11240750. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16132293.


Interactive digital tools to support empowerment of people with cancer: a systematic literature review.

Tuominen L, Leino-Kilpi H, Poraharju J, Cabutto D, Carrion C, Lehtio L Support Care Cancer. 2024; 32(6):396.

PMID: 38816629 PMC: 11139693. DOI: 10.1007/s00520-024-08545-9.

References
1.
Wason J, Stecher L, Mander A . Correcting for multiple-testing in multi-arm trials: is it necessary and is it done?. Trials. 2014; 15:364. PMC: 4177585. DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-364. View

2.
OKeefe E, Meltzer J, Bethea T . Health disparities and cancer: racial disparities in cancer mortality in the United States, 2000-2010. Front Public Health. 2015; 3:51. PMC: 4398881. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2015.00051. View

3.
Rodrigue J, Pavlakis M, Egbuna O, Paek M, Waterman A, Mandelbrot D . The "House Calls" trial: a randomized controlled trial to reduce racial disparities in live donor kidney transplantation: rationale and design. Contemp Clin Trials. 2012; 33(4):811-8. PMC: 3361563. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2012.03.015. View

4.
Hahn E, Glendenning G, Sorensen M, Hudgens S, Druker B, Guilhot F . Quality of life in patients with newly diagnosed chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia on imatinib versus interferon alfa plus low-dose cytarabine: results from the IRIS Study. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21(11):2138-46. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2003.12.154. View

5.
Hahn E, Cella D . Health outcomes assessment in vulnerable populations: measurement challenges and recommendations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003; 84(4 Suppl 2):S35-42. DOI: 10.1053/apmr.2003.50245. View