| Literature DB >> 33755022 |
Robert S Morse1, Kaley Lambden2, Erin Quinn2, Twalib Ngoma3, Beatrice Mushi3, Yun Xian Ho2, Mamsau Ngoma4, Habiba Mahuna4, Sarah B Sagan2, Joshua Mmari4, Susan Miesfeldt5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Improving access to end-of-life symptom control interventions among cancer patients is a public health priority in Tanzania, and innovative community-based solutions are needed. Mobile health technology holds promise; however, existing resources are limited, and outpatient access to palliative care specialists is poor. A mobile platform that extends palliative care specialist access via shared care with community-based local health workers (LHWs) and provides remote support for pain and other symptom management can address this care gap.Entities:
Keywords: cancer; mHealth; mobile health; mobile phone; pain; palliative care; sub-Saharan Africa; user-centered design
Year: 2021 PMID: 33755022 PMCID: PMC8088847 DOI: 10.2196/24062
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JMIR Cancer ISSN: 2369-1999
Figure 1Palliative Care Outcome Scale of the mobile-Palliative Care Link app for a patient and caregiver (for display in Kiswahili). NA indicates that the caregiver is not present.
Figure 2Design and development timeline of the mobile-Palliative Care Link app. Early app use feedback involved only specialists and study personnel; field study results are reported elsewhere.
Figure 3Design of the mPCL app focusing on the patient or caregiver and care team communication and care coordination. mPCL: mobile-Palliative Care Link; POS: Palliative Care Outcome Scale.
Prototype usability test survey results among patients, specialists, and local health workers (n=21).
| Survey item by user group | Responsea | Number of responses to survey items, | |||
|
| Mean (SD) | Range |
| ||
|
| |||||
|
| Ease or difficulty of POSb completion | 1.9 (0.9) | 1-3 | 7 (100) | |
|
| Acceptability of time to complete POS | 1.3 (0.76) | 1-3 | 7 (100) | |
|
| Ease or difficulty of using educational materials | 1.6 (0.79) | 1-3 | 7 (100) | |
|
| Ease or difficulty of making emergency phone calls | 1.2 (0.41) | 1-2 | 6 (86) | |
|
| |||||
|
| Ease or difficulty of creating a clinical record | 1.5 (0.53) | 1-2 | 8 (100) | |
|
| Acceptability of time spent creating a clinical record | 1.3 (0.49) | 1-2 | 8 (100) | |
|
| Ease or difficulty of reviewing a clinical record | 1.1 (0.35) | 1-2 | 8 (100) | |
|
| Acceptability of time spend reviewing a clinical record | 1.3 (0.49) | 1-2 | 7 (88) | |
|
| Ease or difficulty of reviewing POS | 1.6 (0.55) | 1-2 | 5 (63) | |
|
| |||||
|
| Ease or difficulty of reviewing a clinical record | 1.3 (0.82) | 1-3 | 6 (100) | |
|
| Acceptability of time spent reviewing a clinical record | 1 (0.0) | 1-1 | 6 (100) | |
|
| Ease or difficulty of reviewing POS | 2 (0.63) | 1-3 | 6 (100) | |
|
| Acceptability of time spent reviewing POS | 1 (0.0) | 1-1 | 6 (100) | |
|
| Ease or difficulty of recording a patient interaction | 1.8 (0.5) | 1-2 | 4 (67) | |
aAll survey item responses were scored from 1 to 4, with 1=very high degree of ease or acceptability and 4=very low degree of ease or acceptability.
bPOS: Palliative Care Outcome Scale.
Examples of mPCL pilot test feedback and corresponding actions taken.
| Issue identified | Action taken |
| CommCare failed to recognize installation codes necessary to install the mPCLa app on a study phone | ORCIb-based team instructed on resolution |
| CommCare failed to install updates | ORCI-based team instructed on resolution |
| LHWsc and patients unknowingly uninstalled mPCL or reset cellular internet settings | ORCI-based information technology support team member engaged to address issues on demand |
| Study nurse could not complete the mPCL clinical record if the cancer stage was not known | “Unknown” was added as a response selection |
| Patients requested to use their own personal SIM cards rather than using SIM card provided by study | Personal SIM cards were allowed and used with study phones, with participant’s permission |
| ORCI study team noted variability in the ease of training patients on the use of mPCL | Procedure established to capture data on patient’s mPCL training ease or difficulty (eg, number of times patient training repeated and specific challenges encountered during training) |
| Difficulty for the patient to select which care team member they wished to contact by phone in emergency setting (ie, nurse, LHW, or specialist) | mPCL adjusted to allow the patient to more easily select the desired care team member |
| Patients completed more than one Palliative Care Outcome Scale in a given day | Feedback provided to patient that they were submitting duplicate surveys, including a reminder that they could contact a care team member by phone in the event of escalating symptoms |
amPCL: mobile-Palliative Care Link.
bORCI: Ocean Road Cancer Institute.
cLHWs: local health workers.
Figure 4Four separate interfaces for four different user roles (from left to right): patient or caregiver, nurse, specialist physician, and local health worker.
Figure 5Palliative care Outcome Scale responses (mock patient) as viewed in the mobile app on a smartphone (left) and on the web app (right) by the specialist. A red triangle icon is displayed to alert the care team to reported pain scores that are above the set threshold.
Figure 6Clinician web app view of patient information (top) and clinical record of the mock patient record (bottom).
Figure 7Example screenshots of the patient symptom-focused educational resource (displayed in Kiswahili for patients). Patients are able to select specific content areas they would like to learn more about.
Figure 8Screenshots of the emergency contact module. When the patient clicks Yes on the first screen of the module (left), they are advanced to the next screen (right), where they can click on a hyperlink to directly call the designated emergency contact.