Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32712581›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2020

Understanding the Experience of Cancer Pain From the Perspective of Patients and Family Caregivers to Inform Design of an In-Home Smart Health System: Multimethod Approach.

Virginia LeBaron, Rachel Bennett, Ridwan Alam, Leslie Blackhall, Kate Gordon, James Hayes, Nutta Homdee, Randy Jones, Yudel Martinez, Emmanuel Ogunjirin and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Comprehensive assessment of pain characteristics, quality of life, and pain management in cancer patients: a multi-center cross-sectional study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Virginia LeBaronUniversity of Virginia School of Nursing, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1299-4730
Rachel BennettUniversity of Virginia School of Nursing, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6486-1673
Ridwan AlamUniversity of Virginia School of Engineering & Applied Science, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4332-4051
Leslie BlackhallUniversity of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7536-1658
Kate GordonVirginia Commonwealth University Health, Richmond, VA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2555-5128
James HayesUniversity of Virginia School of Engineering & Applied Science, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6918-3381
Nutta HomdeeUniversity of Virginia School of Engineering & Applied Science, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3845-6559
Randy JonesUniversity of Virginia School of Nursing, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2739-5132
Yudel MartinezUniversity of Virginia School of Engineering & Applied Science, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5671-4614
Emmanuel OgunjirinUniversity of Virginia School of Engineering & Applied Science, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8458-3204
Tanya ThomasUniversity of Virginia School of Nursing, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7249-6568
John LachThe George Washington University School of Engineering & Applied Science, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7105-9996
University of Virginia · USGeorge Washington University · USVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInadequately managed pain is a serious problem for patients with cancer and those who care for them. Smart health systems can help with remote symptom monitoring and management, but they must be designed with meaningful end-user input.

objectiveThis study aims to understand the experience of managing cancer pain at home from the perspective of both patients and family caregivers to inform design of the Behavioral and Environmental Sensing and Intervention for Cancer (BESI-C) smart health system.

methodsThis was a descriptive pilot study using a multimethod approach. Dyads of patients with cancer and difficult pain and their primary family caregivers were recruited from an outpatient oncology clinic. The participant interviews consisted of (1) open-ended questions to explore the overall experience of cancer pain at home, (2) ranking of variables on a Likert-type scale (0, no impact; 5, most impact) that may influence cancer pain at home, and (3) feedback regarding BESI-C system prototypes. Qualitative data were analyzed using a descriptive approach to identity patterns and key themes. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS; basic descriptive statistics and independent sample t tests were run.

resultsOur sample (n=22; 10 patient-caregiver dyads and 2 patients) uniformly described the experience of managing cancer pain at home as stressful and difficult. Key themes included (1) unpredictability of pain episodes; (2) impact of pain on daily life, especially the negative impact on sleep, activity, and social interactions; and (3) concerns regarding medications. Overall, taking pain medication was rated as the category with the highest impact on a patient's pain (=4.79), followed by the categories of wellness (=3.60; sleep quality and quantity, physical activity, mood and oral intake) and interaction (=2.69; busyness of home, social or interpersonal interactions, physical closeness or proximity to others, and emotional closeness and connection to others). The category related to environmental factors (temperature, humidity, noise, and light) was rated with the lowest overall impact (=2.51). Patients and family caregivers expressed receptivity to the concept of BESI-C and reported a preference for using a wearable sensor (smart watch) to capture data related to the abrupt onset of difficult cancer pain.

conclusionsSmart health systems to support cancer pain management should (1) account for the experience of both the patient and the caregiver, (2) prioritize passive monitoring of physiological and environmental variables to reduce burden, and (3) include functionality that can monitor and track medication intake and efficacy; wellness variables, such as sleep quality and quantity, physical activity, mood, and oral intake; and levels of social interaction and engagement. Systems must consider privacy and data sharing concerns and incorporate feasible strategies to capture and characterize rapid-onset symptoms.

Indexed as

cancercaregiverhome basedopioidspainpalliative caresensorssmart healthsmart watch

Identifiers

PMID32712581
PMCPMC7481872
OpenAlexW3044944658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.