Goals and Adverse Effects: Rate of Concordance Between Patients and Providers.

PURPOSE: Adequate understanding of the goals and adverse effects of cancer treatment has important implications for patients' decision making, expectations, and mood. This study sought to identify the degree to which patients and clinicians agreed upon the goals and adverse effects of treatment (ie, concordance). METHODS: Patients completed a demographic questionnaire, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer, the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Treatment Satisfaction-General questionnaire, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being questionnaire, and a 13-item questionnaire about the goals and adverse effects of treatment. Providers completed a 12-item questionnaire. RESULTS: One hundred patients (51 female) and 34 providers participated (questionnaire return rate mean difference, 5 days; SD, 16 days). Patient and provider dyads agreed 61% of the time regarding the intent of treatment. In cases of nonagreement, 36% of patients reported more optimistic therapy goals compared to providers. Patients and providers agreed 69% of the time regarding the patient's acknowledgement and understanding of adverse effects. Patients who reported an understanding of likely adverse effects endorsed significantly lower distress scores (mean, 2.5) than those who endorsed not understanding associated adverse effects (mean, 4.1; P = .008). CONCLUSION: Timely data capturing of patient-provider dyadic ratings is feasible. A significant discrepancy exists between a substantial percentage of patients' and providers' views of the intent and adverse effects of treatment. Patients were almost always more optimistic about the intent of treatment. Higher rates of distress were noted in cases of discordance. Providers may benefit from conversational feedback from patients as well as other integrated feedback systems to inform them about patient understanding.

Randomized Controlled Trial of SuperBetter, a Smartphone-Based/Internet-Based Self-Help Tool to Reduce Depressive Symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: Technological advances have sparked the development of computer- and smartphone-based self-help programs for depressed people, but these programs' efficacy is uncertain. This randomized controlled trial evaluated an intervention called SuperBetter (SB), which is accessed via smartphone and/or the SB Web site. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Online, we recruited 283 adult iPhone(®) (Apple, Cupertino, CA) users with significant depression symptoms according to the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression questionnaire (CES-D). They were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (a) a version of SB using cognitive-behavioral therapy and positive psychotherapy strategies to target depression (CBT-PPT SB); (b) a general SB version focused on self-esteem and acceptance (General SB); or (c) a waiting list control group (WL). The two SB groups were instructed to use SB for 10 minutes daily for 1 month. All participants completed psychological distress and well-being measures online every 2 weeks through follow-up. An intent-to-treat analysis was conducted using hierarchical linear modeling. RESULTS: As hypothesized, SB participants achieved greater reductions in CES-D scores than WL participants by posttest (Cohen's d=0.67) and by follow-up (d=1.05). Contrary to prediction, CBT-PPT SB did not perform better than General SB; both versions of SB were more effective than the WL control. Differences between SB versions favored General SB but were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These large effect sizes should be interpreted cautiously in light of high attrition rates and the motivated, self-selected sample. Nonetheless, smartphone-based/Internet-based self-help may play an important role in treating depression.