Desiree R Azizoddin1,2,3, Rosalind Adam4, Daniela Kessler5, Alexi A Wright6,5, Benjamin Kematick7, Clare Sullivan7, Haipeng Zhang7,6,8, Michael J Hassett6,5, Mary E Cooley6,9, Olga Ehrlich9, Andrea C Enzinger7,6,5. 1. Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. DRAzizoddin@BWH.Harvard.edu. 2. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. DRAzizoddin@BWH.Harvard.edu. 3. Department of Emergency Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis St, Thorn Building, Boston, MA, 13-1303, USA. DRAzizoddin@BWH.Harvard.edu. 4. Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK. 5. Division of Population Sciences, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. 6. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 7. Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. 8. Brigham Digital Innovation Hub, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 9. Phyllis F. Cantor Center, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Patient education is critical for management of advanced cancer pain, yet the benefits of psychoeducational interventions have been modest. We used mobile health (mHealth) technology to better meet patients' needs. METHODS: Using the Agile and mHealth Development and Evaluation Frameworks, a multidisciplinary team of clinicians, researchers, patients, and design specialists followed a four-phase iterative process to develop comprehensive, tailored, multimedia cancer pain education for a patient-facing smartphone application. The target population reviewed the content and provided feedback. RESULTS: The resulting application provides comprehensive cancer pain education spanning pharmacologic and behavioral aspects of self-management. Custom graphics, animated videos, quizzes, and audio-recorded relaxations complemented written content. Computable algorithms based upon daily symptom surveys were used to deliver brief, tailored motivational messages that linked to more comprehensive teaching. Patients found the combination of pharmacologic and behavioral support to be engaging and helpful. CONCLUSION: Digital technology can be used to provide cancer pain education that is engaging and tailored to individual needs. A replicable interdisciplinary and patient-centered approach to intervention development was advantageous. mHealth interventions may be a scalable approach to improve cancer pain. Frameworks that merge software and research methodology can be useful in developing interventions.
PURPOSE: Patient education is critical for management of advanced cancer pain, yet the benefits of psychoeducational interventions have been modest. We used mobile health (mHealth) technology to better meet patients' needs. METHODS: Using the Agile and mHealth Development and Evaluation Frameworks, a multidisciplinary team of clinicians, researchers, patients, and design specialists followed a four-phase iterative process to develop comprehensive, tailored, multimedia cancer pain education for a patient-facing smartphone application. The target population reviewed the content and provided feedback. RESULTS: The resulting application provides comprehensive cancer pain education spanning pharmacologic and behavioral aspects of self-management. Custom graphics, animated videos, quizzes, and audio-recorded relaxations complemented written content. Computable algorithms based upon daily symptom surveys were used to deliver brief, tailored motivational messages that linked to more comprehensive teaching. Patients found the combination of pharmacologic and behavioral support to be engaging and helpful. CONCLUSION: Digital technology can be used to provide cancer pain education that is engaging and tailored to individual needs. A replicable interdisciplinary and patient-centered approach to intervention development was advantageous. mHealth interventions may be a scalable approach to improve cancer pain. Frameworks that merge software and research methodology can be useful in developing interventions.
Authors: Robert H Dworkin; Dennis C Turk; John T Farrar; Jennifer A Haythornthwaite; Mark P Jensen; Nathaniel P Katz; Robert D Kerns; Gerold Stucki; Robert R Allen; Nicholas Bellamy; Daniel B Carr; Julie Chandler; Penney Cowan; Raymond Dionne; Bradley S Galer; Sharon Hertz; Alejandro R Jadad; Lynn D Kramer; Donald C Manning; Susan Martin; Cynthia G McCormick; Michael P McDermott; Patrick McGrath; Steve Quessy; Bob A Rappaport; Wendye Robbins; James P Robinson; Margaret Rothman; Mike A Royal; Lee Simon; Joseph W Stauffer; Wendy Stein; Jane Tollett; Joachim Wernicke; James Witter Journal: Pain Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Tamara J Somers; Amy P Abernethy; Sara N Edmond; Sarah A Kelleher; Anava A Wren; Greg P Samsa; Francis J Keefe Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2015-05-27 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Marieke H J van den Beuken-van Everdingen; Laura M J Hochstenbach; Elbert A J Joosten; Vivianne C G Tjan-Heijnen; Daisy J A Janssen Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2016-04-23 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Paulo Menezes; Julieta Quayle; Heloísa Garcia Claro; Simone da Silva; Lena R Brandt; Francisco Diez-Canseco; J Jaime Miranda; LeShawndra N Price; David C Mohr; Ricardo Araya Journal: JMIR Ment Health Date: 2019-04-26
Authors: Tamara J Somers; Sarah A Kelleher; Caroline S Dorfman; Rebecca A Shelby; Hannah M Fisher; Krista Rowe Nichols; Keith M Sullivan; Nelson J Chao; Gregory P Samsa; Amy P Abernethy; Francis J Keefe Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2018-03-19 Impact factor: 4.773