PURPOSE: To develop a prototype website to collect patient-reported outcomes in outpatient clinical oncology and link the data with the electronic medical record (EMR). METHODS: A multidisciplinary Research Network, including experts in outcomes research, clinical oncology, nursing, social work, information technology, EMRs, behavioral science, decision science, clinical trials, law, and a cancer survivor, was formed to design the prototype website. The Research Network developed the initial website specifications, elicited feedback from patients (n = 20) and clinicians (n = 7), constructed the website, and conducted usability testing (n = 10). RESULTS: Clinicians reported that the website could improve clinical practice if it was not burdensome and were most interested in tracking change over time. Patients were interested in using the website because of the potential to facilitate communication with their clinicians. Patients emphasized the importance of short and simple surveys and a user-friendly interface. The PatientView-oint website was designed to meet these specifications. Usability testing suggested that patients had few problems accessing and using the site. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary reports from clinicians and patients suggest that a website to collect PROs and link them with the EMR could help improve the quality of cancer care. Further pilot-testing will evaluate the use, usefulness, and acceptability of PatientViewpoint.
PURPOSE: To develop a prototype website to collect patient-reported outcomes in outpatient clinical oncology and link the data with the electronic medical record (EMR). METHODS: A multidisciplinary Research Network, including experts in outcomes research, clinical oncology, nursing, social work, information technology, EMRs, behavioral science, decision science, clinical trials, law, and a cancer survivor, was formed to design the prototype website. The Research Network developed the initial website specifications, elicited feedback from patients (n = 20) and clinicians (n = 7), constructed the website, and conducted usability testing (n = 10). RESULTS: Clinicians reported that the website could improve clinical practice if it was not burdensome and were most interested in tracking change over time. Patients were interested in using the website because of the potential to facilitate communication with their clinicians. Patients emphasized the importance of short and simple surveys and a user-friendly interface. The PatientView-oint website was designed to meet these specifications. Usability testing suggested that patients had few problems accessing and using the site. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary reports from clinicians and patients suggest that a website to collect PROs and link them with the EMR could help improve the quality of cancer care. Further pilot-testing will evaluate the use, usefulness, and acceptability of PatientViewpoint.
Authors: S A McLachlan; A Allenby; J Matthews; A Wirth; D Kissane; M Bishop; J Beresford; J Zalcberg Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-11-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Donna L Berry; Lisa J Trigg; William B Lober; Bryant T Karras; Mary L Galligan; Mary Austin-Seymour; Stephanie Martin Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2004-09-17 Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Galina Velikova; Laura Booth; Adam B Smith; Paul M Brown; Pamela Lynch; Julia M Brown; Peter J Selby Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-02-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Katherine C Smith; Michael D Brundage; Elliott Tolbert; Emily A Little; Elissa T Bantug; Claire F Snyder Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-05-10 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Claire F Snyder; Joseph M Herman; Sharon M White; Brandon S Luber; Amanda L Blackford; Michael A Carducci; Albert W Wu Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2014-07-01 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Stefan Stefanovic; Markus Wallwiener; Uros Karic; Christoph Domschke; Luka Katic; Florin-Andrei Taran; Aleksandra Pesic; Andreas Hartkopf; Peyman Hadji; Martin Teufel; Florian Schuetz; Christof Sohn; Peter Fasching; Andreas Schneeweiss; Sara Brucker Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-10-17 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Michaela A Dinan; Kate L Compton; Jatinder K Dhillon; Bradley G Hammill; Esi Morgan Dewitt; Kevin P Weinfurt; Kevin A Schulman Journal: Med Care Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Susan E Yount; Nan Rothrock; Michael Bass; Jennifer L Beaumont; Deborah Pach; Thomas Lad; Jyoti Patel; Maria Corona; Rebecca Weiland; Katherine Del Ciello; David Cella Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2013-11-07 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Claire F Snyder; Amanda L Blackford; Toru Okuyama; Tatsuo Akechi; Hiroko Yamashita; Tatsuya Toyama; Michael A Carducci; Albert W Wu Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2013-03-27 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Sandra D Griffith; Nicolas R Thompson; Jaivir S Rathore; Lara E Jehi; George E Tesar; Irene L Katzan Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 4.147