FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerBMJ Open

Design and evaluation of a digital health intervention with proactive follow-up by nurses to improve healthcare and outcomes for patients with breast cancer in Mexico: protocol for a randomised clinical trial

Introduction

Nearly 30 000 Mexican women develop breast cancer annually, frequently presenting unmet supportive care needs. In high-income countries, incorporating electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) into cancer care has demonstrated potential for increasing patient-centred care and reducing unmet needs. No such ePRO interventions have been implemented in Mexico. This paper presents the study protocol for designing and evaluating an ePRO digital health application combined with proactive follow-up by nurses.

Methods and analysis

We designed a two-component intervention for women receiving breast cancer treatment: a responsive web application for monitoring ePROs and clinical algorithms guiding proactive follow-up by nurses. We will conduct a pilot test of the intervention with 50 patients with breast cancer for 6 weeks to assess feasibility and adjust the application. We will conduct a parallel arm randomised controlled trial assigning 205 patients each to intervention and control in one of Mexico’s largest public oncology hospitals. The intervention will be provided for 6 months, with additional 3 months of post-intervention observation. The control group will receive usual healthcare and a list of breast cancer information sources. Women diagnosed with stages I, II or III breast cancer who initiate chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy will be invited to participate. The primary study outcome will be supportive care needs; secondary outcomes include global quality of life and breast symptoms. Information on the outcomes will be obtained through web-based self-administered questionnaires collected at baseline, 1, 3, 6 and 9 months.

Ethics and dissemination

The National Research and Ethics Committees of the Mexican Institute of Social Security approved the study (R-2021-785-059). Participants will sign an informed consent form prior to their inclusion. Findings will be disseminated through a policy brief to the local authorities, a webinar for patients, publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at national and international conferences.

Trial registration number

NCT05925257.

(Cost-)effectiveness of an individualised risk prediction tool (PERSARC) on patients knowledge and decisional conflict among soft-tissue sarcomas patients: protocol for a parallel cluster randomised trial (the VALUE-PERSARC study)

Introduction

Current treatment decision-making in high-grade soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) care is not informed by individualised risks for different treatment options and patients’ preferences. Risk prediction tools may provide patients and professionals insight in personalised risks and benefits for different treatment options and thereby potentially increase patients’ knowledge and reduce decisional conflict. The VALUE-PERSARC study aims to assess the (cost-)effectiveness of a personalised risk assessment tool (PERSARC) to increase patients’ knowledge about risks and benefits of treatment options and to reduce decisional conflict in comparison with usual care in high-grade extremity STS patients.

Methods

The VALUE-PERSARC study is a parallel cluster randomised control trial that aims to include at least 120 primarily diagnosed high-grade extremity STS patients in 6 Dutch hospitals. Eligible patients (≥18 years) are those without a treatment plan and treated with curative intent. Patients with sarcoma subtypes or treatment options not mentioned in PERSARC are unable to participate. Hospitals will be randomised between usual care (control) or care with the use of PERSARC (intervention). In the intervention condition, PERSARC will be used by STS professionals in multidisciplinary tumour boards to guide treatment advice and in patient consultations, where the oncological/orthopaedic surgeon informs the patient about his/her diagnosis and discusses benefits and harms of all relevant treatment options. The primary outcomes are patients’ knowledge about risks and benefits of treatment options and decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale) 1 week after the treatment decision has been made. Secondary outcomes will be evaluated using questionnaires, 1 week and 3, 6 and 12 months after the treatment decision. Data will be analysed following an intention-to-treat approach using a linear mixed model and taking into account clustering of patients within hospitals.

Ethics and dissemination

The Medical Ethical Committee Leiden-Den Haag-Delft (METC-LDD) approved this protocol (NL76563.058.21). The results of this study will be reported in a peer-review journal.

Trial registration number

NL9160, NCT05741944.

❌