Feasibility and user experience of digital patient monitoring for real-world patients with lung or breast cancer

Arriola Aperribay, Edurne; Jaal, Jana; Edvardsen, Anne; Silvoniemi, Maria; Araújo, António; Vikström, Anders; Zairi, Eleni; Rodriguez Mues, Mari Carmen; Roccato, Marco; Schneider, Sophie; Ammann, Johannes

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oncolo/oyad289

Feasibility and user experience of digital patient monitoring for real-world patients with lung or breast cancer

License

Citation

Arriola E, Jaal J, Edvardsen A, Silvoniemi M, Araújo A, Vikström A, et al. Feasibility and user experience of digital patient monitoring for real-world patients with lung or breast cancer. Oncologist. 2024 Apr 4;29(4):e561-9. DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyad289

Abstract

Background: Digital patient monitoring (DPM) tools can facilitate early symptom management for patients with cancer through systematic symptom reporting; however, low adherence can be a challenge. We assessed patient/healthcare professional (HCP) use of DPM in routine clinical practice. Materials and methods: Patients with locally advanced/metastatic lung cancer or HER2-positive breast cancer received locally approved/reimbursed drugs alongside DPM, with elements tailored by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, on the Kaiku Health DPM platform. Patient access to the DPM tool was through their own devices (eg, laptops, PCs, smartphones, or tablets), via either a browser or an app on Apple iOS or Android devices. Coprimary endpoints were patient DPM tool adoption (positive threshold: 60%) and week 1-6 adherence to weekly symptom reporting (positive threshold: 70%). Secondary endpoints included experience and clinical impact. Results: At data cutoff (June 9, 2022), adoption was 85% and adherence was 76%. Customer satisfaction and effort scores for patients were 76% and 82%, respectively, and 83% and 79% for HCPs. Patients spent approximately 10 minutes using the DPM tool and completed approximately 1.0 symptom questionnaires per week (completion time 1-4 minutes). HCPs spent approximately 1-3 minutes a week using the tool per patient. Median time to HCP review for alerted versus non-alerted symptom questionnaires was 19.6 versus 21.5 hours. Most patients and HCPs felt that the DPM tool covered/mostly covered symptoms experienced (71% and 75%), was educational (65% and 92%), and improved patient-HCP conversations (70% and 83%) and cancer care (51% and 71%). Conclusion: The DPM tool demonstrated positive adoption, adherence, and user experience for patients with lung/breast cancer, suggesting that DPM tools may benefit clinical cancer care.