A user centered design approach to development of an online self-management program for cancer survivors: Springboard Beyond Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute launched and evaluated a personalized online program leveraging behavioral science principles to help people self-manage physical and emotional symptoms, improve communication skills, and lead healthier lives during and after a cancer diagnosis. METHODS: Cancer survivors were recruited from an academic medical and a community clinical setting (N = 40) to complete in-person user testing of the Springboard Beyond Cancer website, which included action decks and content to promote self-management. Action decks were printable or savable collections of information and action steps related to a cancer topic or treatment side effect. Participants performed structured tasks to evaluate the program's content and usability. Comments and reactions were recorded, and qualitative thematic analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Most participants successfully found information about fatigue (95%), pain (83%), sexual side effects (90%), and support groups (85%). Survivors, particularly those in treatment, found information on the site to be clear, concise, and meeting their needs. Use of action decks to create self-management plans was inconsistent. Survivors reported needing more instruction and support within the program on how to best utilize enhanced functionality in action decks to prioritize their most pressing concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Early stakeholder engagement throughout the multiple phases of prototyping and deployment are needed to fully maximize end user engagement. Providing actionable self-management content and activating tools to cancer survivors via an eHealth program is a feasible and scalable approach to increasing access to self-management tools and addressing cancer survivor needs.

Demonstrating the value of the oncology pharmacist within the healthcare team.

INTRODUCTION: Although many oncology pharmacists are embedded members within the healthcare team, data documenting their contributions to optimal patient outcomes are growing. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the value of the oncology pharmacist within the healthcare team and describe the knowledge, skills, and functions of the oncology pharmacist. METHODS: A systematic literature review of articles that were published on PubMed between January 1951 and October 2018 was completed. Identified abstracts were reviewed and included if they focused on measuring the value or impact of the oncology pharmacist on provider/patient satisfaction, improvement of medication safety, improvement of quality/clinical care outcomes, economics, and intervention acceptance. Review articles, meta-analysis, and studies not evaluating oncology pharmacist activities were excluded. Studies were thematically coded into four themes (clinical care, patient education, informatics, and cost savings) by 10 oncology pharmacists. RESULTS: Four-hundred twenty-two articles were identified, in which 66 articles met inclusion criteria for this review. The selected literature included 27 interventional and 38 descriptive studies. The value of the oncology pharmacist was demonstrated by published articles in four key themes: clinical care, patient education, informatics, and cost savings. CONCLUSION: With an expected shortage of oncology physicians and the ongoing development of complex oncology therapies, the board-certified oncology pharmacist is well suited to serve as a physician extender alongside nurse practitioners and/or physician assistants as the medication expert on the oncology care team. The demonstrated value of the oncology pharmacist supports their role as frontline providers of patient care.

Prostate Cancer Patients' Understanding of the Gleason Scoring System: Implications for Shared Decision-Making.

The Gleason scoring system is a key component of a prostate cancer diagnosis, since it indicates disease aggressiveness. It also serves as a risk communication tool that facilitates shared treatment decision-making. However, the system is highly complex and therefore difficult to communicate: factors which have been shown to undermine well-informed and high-quality shared treatment decision-making. To systematically explore prostate cancer patients' understanding of the Gleason scoring system (GSS), we assessed knowledge and perceived importance among men who had completed treatment (N = 50). Patients were administered a survey that assessed patient knowledge and patients' perceived importance of the GSS, as well as demographics, medical factors (e.g., Gleason score at diagnosis), and health literacy. Bivariate analyses were conducted to identify associations with patient knowledge and perceived importance of the GSS. The sample was generally well-educated (48% with a bachelor's degree or higher) and health literate (M = 12.9, SD = 2.2, range = 3-15). Despite this, patient knowledge of the GSS was low (M = 1.8, SD = 1.4, range = 1-4). Patients' understanding of the importance of the GSS was moderate (M = 2.8, SD = 1.0, range = 0-4) and was positively associated with GSS knowledge (p < .01). Additionally, GSS knowledge was negatively associated with years since biopsy (p < .05). Age and health literacy were positively associated with patients' perceived importance of the GSS (p < .05), but not with GSS knowledge. Patient knowledge is thus less than optimal and would benefit from enhanced communication to maximize shared treatment decision-making. Future studies are needed to explore the potential utility of a simplified Gleason grading system and improved patient-provider communication.

Testing with feedback improves recall of information in informed consent: A proof of concept study.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigates whether applying educational testing approaches to an informed consent video for a medical procedure can lead to greater recall of the information presented. METHODS: Undergraduate students (n=120) were randomly assigned to watch a 20-min video on informed consent under one of three conditions: 1) tested using multiple-choice knowledge questions and provided with feedback on their answers after each 5-min segment; 2) tested with multiple choice knowledge questions but not provided feedback after each segment; or 3) watched the video without knowledge testing. RESULTS: Participants who were tested and provided feedback had significantly greater information recall compared to those who were tested but not provided feedback and to those not tested. The effect of condition was stronger for moderately difficult questions versus easy questions. CONCLUSIONS: Inserting knowledge tests and providing feedback about the responses at timed intervals in videos can be effective in improving recall of information. PRACTICAL IMPLICATION: Providing informed consent information through a video not only standardizes the material, but using testing with feedback inserted within the video has the potential to increase recall and retention of this material.