ABSTRACT
Background: Due to digitization in the medical sector, many healthcare interactions are switched to online services. This study assessed the acceptance of video consultations (VCs) in cancer care, and determined drivers and barriers of acceptance. Methods: A cross-sectional online-based survey study was conducted in Germany from February 2022 to February 2023. Recruitment took place at oncology outpatient clinics, general practitioners, oncology practices and via cancer-related social media channels. Inclusion criteria were a cancer diagnosis, cancer treatment and internet access. Sociodemographic, medical data, eHealth-related data were acquired via an online assessment. The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model was used to determine the acceptance of VC and its predictors. Results: Of N = 350 cancer patients, 56.0% (n = 196) reported high acceptance of VC, 28.0% (n = 98) stated moderate acceptance and 16.0% (n = 56) indicated low acceptance. Factors influencing acceptance were younger age (ß = -.28, p < .001), female gender (ß = .35, p = .005), stage of disease (ß = .11, p = .032), high digital confidence (ß = .14, p = .010), low internet anxiety (ß = -.21, p = .001), high digital overload (ß = -.12, p = .022), high eHealth literacy (ß = .14, p = .028), personal trust (ß = -.25, p < .001), internet use (ß = .17, p = .002), and the UTAUT predictors: performance expectancy (ß = .24, p < .001), effort expectancy (ß = .26, p < .001), and social influence (ß = .34, p < .001). Conclusions: Patients' acceptance of VC in cancer care is high. Drivers and barriers to acceptance identified should be considered for personalized applications. Considering the growing demand for cancer care establishing digital healthcare solutions is justified.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Distress assessment of cancer patients is considered state-of-the-art. In addition to distress scores, individual care needs are an important factor for the initiation of psycho-oncological interventions. In a mono-centric, observational study, we aimed for characterization of patients indicating a subjective need but declining to utilize support services immediately to facilitate implementation of adapted screenings. METHODS: This study analyzed retrospective data from routine distress screening and associated data from hospital records. Descriptive, variance and regression analyses were used to assess characteristics of postponed support utilization in patients with mixed cancer diagnoses in different treatment settings. RESULTS: Of the total sample (N = 1863), 13% indicated a subjective need but postponed support utilization. This subgroup presented as being as burdened by symptoms of depression (p < 0.001), anxiety (p < 0.001) and distress (p < 0.001) as subjectively distressed patients with intent to directly utilize support. Time periods since diagnosis were shorter (p = 0.007) and patients were more often inpatients (p = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: Despite high heterogeneity among the subgroups, this study identified distress-related factors and time since diagnosis as possible predictors for postponed utilization of psycho-oncological interventions. Results suggest the necessity for time-individualized support which may improve utilization by distressed patients.
