Kristin H Mullen1, Donna L Berry, Brenda K Zierler. 1. Palliative Care Service, Department of Veterans Affairs, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA. kmullen@u.washington.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE/ OBJECTIVES: To determine the acceptability and usability of a computerized quality-of-life (QOL) and symptom assessment tool and the graphically displayed QOL and symptom output in an ambulatory radiation oncology clinic. DESIGN: Descriptive, cross-sectional. SETTING: Radiation oncology clinic located in an urban university medical center. SAMPLE: 45 patients with cancer being evaluated for radiation therapy and 10 clinicians, who submitted 12 surveys. METHODS: Acceptability of the computerized assessment was measured with an online, 16-item, Likert-style survey delivered as 45 patients undergoing radiation therapy completed a 25-item QOL and symptom assessment. Usability of the graphic output was assessed with clinician completion of a four-item paper survey. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Acceptability and usability of computerized patient assessment. FINDINGS: The patient acceptability survey indicated that 70% (n = 28) liked computers and 10% (n = 4) did not. The program was easy to use for 79% (n = 26), easy to understand for 91% (n = 30), and enjoyable for 71% (n = 24). Seventy-six percent (n = 25) believed that the amount of time needed to complete the computerized survey was acceptable. Sixty-six percent (n = 21) responded that they were satisfied with the program, and none of the participants chose the very dissatisfied response. Eighty-three percent (n = 10) of the clinicians found the graphic output helpful in promoting communication with patients, 75% (n = 9) found the output report helpful in identifying appropriate areas of QOL deficits or concerns, and 83% (n = 10) indicated that the output helped guide clinical interactions with patients. CONCLUSIONS: The computer-based QOL and symptom assessment tool is acceptable to patients, and the graphically displayed QOL and symptom output is useful to radiation oncology nurses and physicians. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Wider application of computerized patient-generated data can continue in various cancer settings and be tested for clinical and organizational outcomes.
PURPOSE/ OBJECTIVES: To determine the acceptability and usability of a computerized quality-of-life (QOL) and symptom assessment tool and the graphically displayed QOL and symptom output in an ambulatory radiation oncology clinic. DESIGN: Descriptive, cross-sectional. SETTING: Radiation oncology clinic located in an urban university medical center. SAMPLE: 45 patients with cancer being evaluated for radiation therapy and 10 clinicians, who submitted 12 surveys. METHODS: Acceptability of the computerized assessment was measured with an online, 16-item, Likert-style survey delivered as 45 patients undergoing radiation therapy completed a 25-item QOL and symptom assessment. Usability of the graphic output was assessed with clinician completion of a four-item paper survey. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Acceptability and usability of computerized patient assessment. FINDINGS: The patient acceptability survey indicated that 70% (n = 28) liked computers and 10% (n = 4) did not. The program was easy to use for 79% (n = 26), easy to understand for 91% (n = 30), and enjoyable for 71% (n = 24). Seventy-six percent (n = 25) believed that the amount of time needed to complete the computerized survey was acceptable. Sixty-six percent (n = 21) responded that they were satisfied with the program, and none of the participants chose the very dissatisfied response. Eighty-three percent (n = 10) of the clinicians found the graphic output helpful in promoting communication with patients, 75% (n = 9) found the output report helpful in identifying appropriate areas of QOL deficits or concerns, and 83% (n = 10) indicated that the output helped guide clinical interactions with patients. CONCLUSIONS: The computer-based QOL and symptom assessment tool is acceptable to patients, and the graphically displayed QOL and symptom output is useful to radiation oncology nurses and physicians. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Wider application of computerized patient-generated data can continue in various cancer settings and be tested for clinical and organizational outcomes.
Authors: Donna L Berry; Brent A Blumenstein; Barbara Halpenny; Seth Wolpin; Jesse R Fann; Mary Austin-Seymour; Nigel Bush; Bryant T Karras; William B Lober; Ruth McCorkle Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-01-31 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: S E Wolpin; B Halpenny; G Whitman; J McReynolds; M Stewart; W B Lober; D L Berry Journal: Health Informatics J Date: 2014-01-09 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: B Mayrbäurl; L M Wintner; J M Giesinger; Th Himmelfreundpointner; S Burgstaller; B Holzner; J Thaler Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2011-12-29 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Seth Wolpin; Donna Berry; Mary Austin-Seymour; Nigel Bush; Jesse R Fann; Barbara Halpenny; William B Lober; Ruth McCorkle Journal: Comput Inform Nurs Date: 2008 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 1.985