Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36180905›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2022

Exploring patient experiences with a telehealth approach for the PRO-ACTIVE trial intervention in head and neck cancer patients.

M M Khan, B Manduchi, V Rodriguez, M I Fitch, C E A Barbon, H McMillan, K A Hutcheson, R Martino

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

8 authors.

M M KhanDepartment of Speech-Language Pathology, University of Toronto, 160-500 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, M5G 1V7, Canada.
B ManduchiDepartment of Speech-Language Pathology, University of Toronto, 160-500 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, M5G 1V7, Canada.
V RodriguezDepartment of Speech-Language Pathology, University of Toronto, 160-500 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, M5G 1V7, Canada.
M I FitchBloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
C E A BarbonDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 7007 Bertner Ave., Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
H McMillanDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 7007 Bertner Ave., Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
K A HutchesonDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 7007 Bertner Ave., Houston, TX, 77030, USA. KArnold@mdanderson.org.
R MartinoDepartment of Speech-Language Pathology, University of Toronto, 160-500 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, M5G 1V7, Canada. rosemary.martino@utoronto.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3298-7714

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFollowing the COVID-19 directive to cease non-essential services, a rapid shift was made in the delivery of Speech Language Pathology (SLP) dysphagia management in the 3-arm, randomized PRO-ACTIVE trial. To inform future programs, this study explored patients' experiences with telehealth when the planned in-person SLP intervention was moved to a telehealth modality.

methodsA theory-guided qualitative descriptive approach was used. Willing participants who had received at least one telehealth swallowing therapy session participated in a one-time semi-structured interview. Interview transcripts were subjected to a standard qualitative content/theme analysis. Researchers reviewed all transcripts and used a multi-step analysis process to build a coding framework through consensus discussion. Summaries and key messages were generated for each code.

resultsEleven participants recounted their telehealth experiences and reported feeling satisfied, comfortable and confident with the session(s). They identified that previous experience with teleconferencing, access to optimal technical equipment, clinician skill, and caregiver assistance facilitated their telehealth participation. Participants highlighted that telehealth was beneficial as it reduced commuting time, COVID-19 exposure and fatigue from travel; and also allowed caregiver participation particularly during COVID. In comparing their in-person SLP sessions to telehealth sessions, limitations were also identified, including: lack of previous experience with and/or poor access to technology, and less opportunity for personalization. Participants indicated that use of phone alone was less preferred than an audio/video platform. DISCUSSION: Patients reported that overall, telehealth sessions did not compromise their learning experience when compared to in-person sessions. Patients benefited from use of telehealth in several ways despite some limitations of the use of technology. Patient feedback about telehealth provides an important perspective that may be critical to inform best practices for care delivery.

Indexed as

COVID-19Deglutition DisordersHead and Neck NeoplasmsTelemedicineDelivery of Health CareHumansPatient Outcome AssessmentDysphagiaHead and neck cancerPatient experienceRehabilitationTelehealth

Identifiers

PMID36180905
PMCPMC9523628

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.