Dataset Information

Use of the ONCO-TreC electronic diary compared with a standard paper diary to improve adherence to oral cancer therapy in patients with solid and haematological tumours: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

ONCO-TreC platform consists of a mobile application delivered to patients as electronic diary and a web-based dashboard managed by healthcare professionals. We aim to compare the effectiveness of ONCO-TreC electronic diary with a standard paper diary, in improving adherence to oral cancer therapy in patients with solid and haematological tumours.

Methods and analysis

This is an open label, superiority, randomised controlled trial conducted in two Italian oncology units. Patients will be randomised with a 1:1 ratio to electronic or paper diary. For both groups a counsellor will be responsible for drug and diary delivery. The evaluation period will end after six cycles of therapy. The primary aim is to compare the proportion of non-adherent patients in the two arms. Adherence will be measured through pill count; anyone who takes less than 90% of the total prescribed drug dose will be considered non-adherent. Assuming a percentage of non-adherent patients to oral therapy of 40% in arm B, and a 60% reduction in this percentage in arm A, a sample of 124 patients will provide 80% power to identify an absolute difference greater than 24 percentage points using a bilateral Fisher's exact test with a significance level of 0.05. Considering a dropout rate of 10%, approximately 136 patients will have to be enrolled. The primary analysis will be performed on the intention-to-treat population. Secondary aims are to describe the reasons for non-adherence, the level of satisfaction of patients and healthcare professionals with the paper and electronic diary, and the impact of non-adherence in terms of healthcare costs.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval was obtained from Romagna Ethics Committee (CEROM), study ID 2108, prot. n. IRST 100.28 of 10/04/2020. Informed consent will be obtained from all study participants. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conferences and event presentations.

Protocol version

Version 2, 6 April 2021.

Trial registration number

NCT04826458.

SUBMITTER: Passardi A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8753414 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is growing interest in the use of information communication technologies to treat obesity. An intervention delivered by smartphone could be a convenient, potentially cost-effective, and wide-reaching weight management strategy. Although there have been studies of texting-based interventions and smartphone applications (apps) used as adjuncts to other treatments, there are currently no randomized controlled trials (RCT) of a stand-alone smartphone application for weight loss that focuses primarily on self-monitoring of diet and physical activity.ObjectiveThe aim of this pilot study was to collect acceptability and feasibility outcomes of a self-monitoring weight management intervention delivered by a smartphone app, compared to a website and paper diary.MethodsA sample of 128 overweight volunteers were randomized to receive a weight management intervention delivered by smartphone app, website, or paper diary. The smartphone app intervention, My Meal Mate (MMM), was developed by the research team using an evidence-based behavioral approach. The app incorporates goal setting, self-monitoring of diet and activity, and feedback via weekly text message. The website group used an existing commercially available slimming website from a company called Weight Loss Resources who also provided the paper diaries. The comparator groups delivered a similar self-monitoring intervention to the app, but by different modes of delivery. Participants were recruited by email, intranet, newsletters, and posters from large local employers. Trial duration was 6 months. The intervention and comparator groups were self-directed with no ongoing human input from the research team. The only face-to-face components were at baseline enrollment and brief follow-up sessions at 6 weeks and 6 months to take anthropometric measures and administer questionnaires.ResultsTrial retention was 40/43 (93%) in the smartphone group, 19/42 (55%) in the website group, and 20/43 (53%) in the diary group at 6 months. Adherence was statistically significantly higher in the smartphone group with a mean of 92 days (SD 67) of dietary recording compared with 35 days (SD 44) in the website group and 29 days (SD 39) in the diary group (P<.001). Self-monitoring declined over time in all groups. In an intention-to-treat analysis using baseline observation carried forward for missing data, mean weight change at 6 months was -4.6 kg (95% CI -6.2 to -3.0) in the smartphone app group, -2.9 kg (95% CI -4.7 to -1.1) in the diary group, and -1.3 kg (95% CI -2.7 to 0.1) in the website group. BMI change at 6 months was -1.6 kg/m(2) (95% CI -2.2 to -1.1) in the smartphone group, -1.0 kg/m(2) (95% CI -1.6 to -0.4) in the diary group, and -0.5 kg/m(2) (95% CI -0.9 to 0.0) in the website group. Change in body fat was -1.3% (95% CI -1.7 to -0.8) in the smartphone group, -0.9% (95% CI -1.5 to -0.4) in the diary group, and -0.5% (95% CI -0.9 to 0.0) in the website group.ConclusionsThe MMM app is an acceptable and feasible weight loss intervention and a full RCT of this approach is warranted.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01744535; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01744535 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6FEtc3PVB).

Project description:BackgroundElectronic prescriptions are often created and delivered electronically to the pharmacy while paper-based/handwritten prescriptions may be delivered to the pharmacy by the patients. These differences in the mode of creation and transmission of the two types of prescription could influence the rate at which outpatients fill new prescriptions of previously untried medications.ObjectivesThis study aimed to evaluate literatures to determine the impact of electronic prescribing compared with paper-based/handwritten prescribing on primary medication adherence in an outpatient setting.MethodsThe keywords and phrases "outpatients," "e-prescriptions," "paper-based prescriptions," and "primary medication adherence" were combined with their relevant synonyms and medical subject headings. A comprehensive literature search was conducted on EMBASE, CINAHL, and MEDLINE databases, and Google Scholar. The results of the search were screened and selected using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) was used for quality appraisal of included studies. Data relevant to the objective of the review were extracted and analyzed through narrative synthesis.ResultsA total of 10 original studies were included in the final review, including 1 prospective randomized study and 9 observational studies. Nine of the 10 studies were performed in the United States. Four of the studies indicated that electronic prescribing significantly increases initial medication adherence, while four of the studies suggested the opposite. The remaining two studies found no significant difference in primary medication adherence between the two methods of prescribing. The variations in the studies did not allow the homogeneity required for meta-analysis to be achieved.ConclusionThe conflicting findings relating to the efficacy of primary medication adherence across both systems demonstrate the need for a standardized measure of medication adherence. This would help further determine the respective benefits of both approaches. Future research should also be conducted in different countries to give a more accurate representation of adherence.

Project description:BackgroundThe cost-effectiveness of using a mobile diary app as an adjunct in dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) in patients with borderline personality disorder is unknown.ObjectiveThis study aims to perform an economic evaluation of a mobile diary app compared with paper-based diary cards in DBT treatment for patients with borderline personality disorder in a psychiatric outpatient facility.MethodsThis study was conducted alongside a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. The participants were recruited at 5 Danish psychiatric outpatient facilities and were randomized to register the emotions, urges, and skills used in a mobile diary app or on paper-based diary cards. The participants in both groups received DBT delivered by the therapists. A cost-consequence analysis with a time horizon of 12 months was performed. Consequences included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), depression severity, borderline severity, suicidal behavior, health care use, treatment compliance, and system usability. All relevant costs were included. Focus group interviews were conducted with patients, therapists, researchers, and industry representatives to discuss the potential advantages and disadvantages of using a mobile diary app.ResultsA total of 78 participants were included in the analysis. An insignificantly higher number of participants in the paper group dropped out before the start of treatment (P=.07). Of those starting treatment, participants in the app group had an average of 37.1 (SE 27.55) more days of treatment and recorded an average of 3.16 (SE 5.10) more skills per week than participants in the paper group. Participants in both groups had a QALY gain and a decrease in depression severity, borderline severity, and suicidal behavior. Significant differences were found in favor of the paper group for both QALY gain (adjusted difference -0.054; SE 0.03) and reduction in depression severity (adjusted difference -1.11; SE 1.57). The between-group difference in total costs ranged from US $107.37 to US $322.10 per participant during the 12 months. The use of services in the health care sector was similar across both time points and groups (difference: psychiatric hospitalization <5 and <5; general practice -1.32; SE 3.68 and 2.02; SE 3.19). Overall, the patients showed high acceptability and considered the app as being easy to use. Therapists worried about potential negative influences on the therapist-patient interaction from new work tasks accompanying the introduction of the new technology but pointed at innovation potential from digital database registrations.ConclusionsThis study suggests both positive and negative consequences of mobile diary apps as adjuncts to DBT compared with paper diary cards. More research is needed to draw conclusions regarding its cost-effectiveness.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03191565; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03191565.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/17737.

Project description:BackgroundA platform designed to support the home management of oral anticancer treatments and provide a secure web-based patient-health care professional communication modality, ONCO-TreC, was tested in 3 cancer centers in Italy.ObjectiveThe overall aims of the trial are to customize the platform; assess the system's ability to facilitate the shared management of oral anticancer therapies by patients and health professionals; and evaluate system usability and acceptability by patients, caregivers, and health care professionals.MethodsPatients aged ≥18 years who were candidates for oral anticancer treatment as monotherapy with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 to 1 and a sufficient level of familiarity with mobile devices were eligible. ONCO-TreC consisted of a mobile app for patients and a web-based dashboard for health care professionals. Adherence to treatment (pill count) and toxicities reported by patients through the app were compared with those reported by physicians in medical records. Usability and acceptability were evaluated using questionnaires.ResultsA total of 40 patients were enrolled, 38 (95%) of whom were evaluable for adherence to treatment. The ability of the system to measure adherence to treatment was high, with a concordance of 97.3% (95% CI 86.1%-99.9%) between the investigator and system pill count. Only 60% (3/5) of grade 3, 54% (13/24) of grade 2, and 19% (7/36) of grade 1 adverse events reported by physicians in the case report forms were also reported in the app directly by patients. In total, 94% (33/35) of patients had ≥1 app launch each week, and the median number of daily accesses per patient was 2. Approximately 71% (27/38) and 68% (26/38) of patients used the app for messages and vital sign entering, respectively, at least once during the study period.ConclusionsONCO-TreC is an important tool for measuring and monitoring adherence to oral anticancer drugs. System usability and acceptability were very high, whereas its reliability in registering toxicity could be improved.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02921724; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02921724.