Acceptance of Digital Health Technologies in Palliative Care Patients.

Background: Digital health technologies have potential to transform palliative care (PC) services. The global aging population poses unique challenges for PC, which digital health technologies may help overcome. Evaluation of attitudes and perceptions combined with quantification of prior use habits favor an understanding of psychological barriers to PC patient acceptance of digital health technologies including artificial intelligence (AI). Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the attitudes and perceptions of PC patients regarding a broad range of digital health technologies used in their routine monitoring and treatment and identify barriers to use. Methods: We used a 39-item questionnaire to evaluate acceptance and use of smartphone-based electronic patient report outcome measures, wearables, AI, data privacy, and virtual reality (VR) in 29 female and male PC inpatients. Results: A majority of patients indicated an interest in (69.0%) and positive attitude toward (75.9%) digital health technologies. Nearly all (93.1%) patients believe that digital health technologies will become more important in medicine in the future. Most patients would consider using their smartphone (79.3%) or wearable (69.0%) more often for their health. The most feasible technologies were smartphones, wearables, and VR. Barriers to acceptance included unfamiliarity, data security, errors in data interpretation, and loss of personal interaction through AI. Conclusion: In this patient survey, acceptance of new technologies in a PC patient population was high, encouraging its use also at the end-of-life.

Virtual Reality Therapy in Palliative Care: A Case Series.

OBJECTIVES: Virtual reality (VR) opens a variety of therapeutic options to improve symptom burden in patients with advanced disease. Until to date, only few studies have evaluated the use of VR therapy in the context of palliative care. This case series aims to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of VR therapy in a population of palliative care patients. METHODS: In this single-site case series, we report on six palliative care patients undergoing VR therapy. The VR therapy consisted of a one-time session ranging between 20 to 60 minutes depending on the patient's needs and the content chosen for the VR sessions. A semi-structured survey was conducted and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) and the Distress Thermometer were performed pre- and post-intervention. RESULTS: Overall, VR therapy was well accepted by all patients. Five out of six patients reported having appreciated VR therapy. There were individual differences of perceived effects using VR therapy. The semi-structured survey revealed that some patients felt a temporary detachment from their body and that patients were able to experience the VR session as a break from omnipresent worries and the hospital environment ("I completely forgot where I am"). There was a considerable reduction in the total ESAS score post-treatment (T0 ESASTot = 27.2; T1 ESASTot = 18.8) and a slightly reduction in distress (T0 DTTot = 4.4; T1 DTTot = 3.8). However, two patients were more tired after the intervention.Significance of Results: Our preliminary results demonstrate that VR therapy is acceptable, feasible and safe for use within a palliative care population and appears to be a viable treatment option. Clinical trials are both warranted and necessary to confirm any therapeutic effects of VR therapy, as is the need to tailor VR systems better for use in palliative care settings.