| Literature DB >> 32733661 |
Javier Navarro-Alamán1, Raquel Lacuesta1,2, Iván García-Magariño3,4, Jesús Gallardo1, Elena Ibarz5, Jaime Lloret6,7.
Abstract
The management of cancer patients' symptoms in doctor consultations is a cornerstone in clinical care, this process being fundamental for the follow-up of the evolution of these. This article presents an application that allows collecting periodically and systematically the data of cancer patients and their visualization by the medical team. In this article, we made the analysis, design, implementation, and final evaluation by analyzing the correlation of this data collection with interaction patterns to determine how the user information can be enriched with information from the interaction patterns. We have followed an agile methodology based on the iterative and incremental development of successive prototypes with increased fidelity, where the requirements and solutions have evolved over time according to the need and assessments made. The comprehensive analysis of the patient's condition allowed us to perform a first analysis of the correlation of the states of patients concerning mood, sleeping quality, and pain with the interaction patterns. A future goal of this project is to optimize the process of data collection and the analysis of information. Another future goal is to reduce the time dedicated to reporting the evolution of symptoms in face-to-face consultations and to help professionals in analyzing the patient's evolution even in the period that has not been attended in person.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32733661 PMCID: PMC7378616 DOI: 10.1155/2020/3057032
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1Screens of the user interface 1: (a) mood selection and (b) sleep quality selection.
Figure 2Screens of the user interface 2: (a) pain/discomfort selection, (b) pain level selection, and (c) body parts with pain selection.
Figure 3Activity diagrams of Close2U app.
Figure 4Sequence diagram of Close2U app.
Relation of mood changes and time of realization.
| Average | Undecided | Radiant | Animated | Normal | Discouraged | Horrible |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Num. changes when selecting mood (#) | 1.57 | 0.22 | 0.39 | 0.24 | 0.67 | 1.50 |
| Survey completion time (mm:ss) | 00:57 | 01:08 | 00:57 | 01:00 | 01:16 | 01:36 |
Figure 5Relation of mood changes and time of realization.
Relation of pain level changes and time of realization.
| Average | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Num. changes when selecting pain level (#) | 0.08 | 0.42 | 0.78 | 0.42 | 0.93 | 0.67 | 0.31 | 0.61 | 1.00 | 1.43 |
| Survey completion time (mm:ss) | 01:40 | 01:29 | 01:19 | 01:30 | 01:16 | 01:17 | 00:59 | 01:43 | 03:35 | 02:30 |
Figure 6Relation of pain level changes and time of realization.
Relation of pain changes and time of realization.
| Average | No pain | Pain | Discomfort |
|---|---|---|---|
| Num. changes when selecting pain (#) | 0.00 | 0.04 | 0.13 |
| Survey completion time (mm:ss) | 00:49 | 01:22 | 01:24 |
Figure 7Relation of pain changes and time of realization.
Relation of sleep quality changes and time of realization.
| Sleeping quality | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Num. changes when selecting sleep quality (#) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.14 | 0.27 | 0.15 | 0.23 | 0.12 | 0.56 | 0.75 | 0.58 | 1.07 |
| Survey completion time (mm:ss) | 01:06 | 04:25 | 01:19 | 00:51 | 00:53 | 01:05 | 00:54 | 01:07 | 01:11 | 00:57 | 01:05 |
Figure 8Relation of sleep quality changes and time of realization.
Pearson's correlation test between user variables and number of changes when selecting the response for these variables, respectively.
| Mood | Num. changes when selecting mood | Sleep | Num. changes when selecting sleep | Pain | Num. changes when selecting pain | Pain level | Num. changes when selecting mood pain level | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mood | Pearson's correlation | 1 | −0.172 | −0.133 | −0.054 | −0.158 | −0.080 | −0.335 | −0.035 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.003 | 0.234 | 0.000 | 0.074 | 0.000 | 0.438 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Num. changes when selecting mood | Pearson's correlation | −0.0172 | 1 | 0.084 | 0.166 | −0.052 | 0.023 | 0.115 | 0.035 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.061 | 0.000 | 0.244 | 0.608 | 0.010 | 0.433 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Sleep | Pearson's correlation | −0.133 | 0.084 | 1 | 0.300 | 0.121 | 0.027 | 0.125 | 0.037 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.003 | 0.061 | 0.000 | 0.007 | 0.548 | 0.005 | 0.412 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Num. changes when selecting sleep | Pearson's correlation | −0.054 | 0.166 | 0.300 | 1 | 0.053 | −0.025 | 0.139 | 0.402 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.234 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.234 | 0.581 | 0.002 | 0.000 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Pain | Pearson's correlation | −0.158 | −0.052 | 0.121 | 0.053 | 1 | 0.194 | 0.703 | 0.393 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.244 | 0.007 | 0.234 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Num. changes when selecting pain | Pearson's correlation | −0.080 | 0.023 | 0.027 | −0.025 | 0.194 | 1 | 0.149 | 0.049 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.074 | 0.608 | 0.548 | 0.581 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.274 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Pain level | Pearson's correlation | −0.335 | 0.115 | 0.125 | 0.139 | 0.703 | 0.149 | 1 | 0.371 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.010 | 0.005 | 0.002 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.000 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Num. changes when selecting mood pain level | Pearson's correlation | −0.035 | 0.035 | 0.037 | 0.402 | 0.393 | 0.049 | 0.371 | 1 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.438 | 0.433 | 0.412 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.274 | 0.000 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Pearson's correlation test between survey time and user variables.
| Survey time | Mood | Sleep | Pain | Pain level | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Survey time | Pearson's correlation | 1 | −0.049 | 0.007 | 0.335 | 0.323 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.272 | 0.874 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
|
| ||||||
| Mood | Pearson's correlation | −0.049 | 1 | −0.133 | −0.158 | −0.335 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.272 | 0.003 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
|
| ||||||
| Sleep | Pearson's correlation | 0.007 | −0.133 | 1 | 0.121 | 0.125 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.874 | 0.003 | 0.007 | 0.005 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
|
| ||||||
| Pain | Pearson's correlation | 0.335 | −0.158 | 0.121 | 1 | 0.703 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.007 | 0.000 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
|
| ||||||
| Pain level | Pearson's correlation | 0.323 | −0.335 | 0.125 | 0.703 | 1 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.005 | 0.000 | ||
| N | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | 497 | |
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Figure 9Results of the SUS scale.