Dataset Information

Feasibility, Acceptability, and Clinical Significance of a Dyadic, Web-Based, Psychosocial and Physical Activity Self-Management Program (TEMPO) Tailored to the Needs of Men with Prostate Cancer and Their Caregivers: A Multi-Center Randomized Pilot Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer diagnosis among men. Family caregivers (often female spouses) play a key role in ensuring patients' needs are met, frequently assuming their role with no formal training, which can contribute to a high burden. The purpose of this study was to pilot TEMPO-the first dyadic, Tailored, wEb-based, psychosocial and physical activity self-Management PrOgram for men with prostate cancer and their caregivers.

Methods

49 men with prostate cancer and their caregivers were randomized to TEMPO or usual care. Baseline and follow-up questionnaires were completed to assess feasibility, acceptability, and clinical significance. A priori benchmarks for these outcomes were set. Thirteen exit interviews were conducted to further explore acceptability.

Results

Feasibility benchmarks were met with the exception for recruitment with on average 6.1 dyads recruited/month (benchmark: 8 dyads/month). Benchmarks of acceptability focused on attrition (<25%) and system usability, which were met. Using the strict criteria for adherence of 100% of the module viewed and participants spending at least 15 min on the module, 45% of participants were adherent. The clinical significance on anxiety and quality of life was supported for caregivers, and mostly supported for the men with prostate cancer.

Conclusion

This pilot trial was successful, with minor modifications needed prior to a large trial.

SUBMITTER: Lambert SD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8871005 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Feasibility, Acceptability, and Clinical Significance of a Dyadic, Web-Based, Psychosocial and Physical Activity Self-Management Program (<i>TEMPO</i>) Tailored to the Needs of Men with Prostate Cancer and Their Caregivers: A Multi-Center Randomized Pilot Trial.

Lambert Sylvie D SD Duncan Lindsay R LR Culos-Reed S Nicole SN Hallward Laura L Higano Celestia S CS Loban Ekaterina E Katz Anne A De Raad Manon M Ellis Janet J Korman Melissa B MB Sears Carly C Ibberson Cindy C Walker Lauren L Belzile Eric E Saha-Chaudhuri Paramita P McTaggart-Cowan Helen H Peacock Stuart S

Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) 20220201 2

<h4>Background</h4>Prostate cancer is the most common cancer diagnosis among men. Family caregivers (often female spouses) play a key role in ensuring patients' needs are met, frequently assuming their role with no formal training, which can contribute to a high burden. The purpose of this study was to pilot <i>TEMPO</i>-the first dyadic, Tailored, wEb-based, psychosocial and physical activity self-Management PrOgram for men with prostate cancer and their caregivers.<h4>Methods</h4>49 men with p ...[more]

PMID: 35200566

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundProstate cancer predisposes patients and caregivers to a wide range of complex physical and psychosocial challenges, and interventions must incorporate a wide range of self-management strategies to help patients and their caregivers effectively cope with cancer challenges. To palliate this need, our team recently developed and evaluated the initial acceptability of a dyadic, Tailored, wEb-based, psychosocial, and physical activity self-Management PrOgram (TEMPO). TEMPO is a 10-week, interactive, web-based intervention consisting of five modules designed to help dyads manage their physical and psychosocial needs. It aims to teach dyads new self-management strategies and encourages them to increase their physical activity (PA) levels, mainly through walking and strength-based exercises. Initial acceptability evaluation of TEMPO revealed high user satisfaction, in addition to having a number of potential benefits for participants. After integrating suggested changes to TEMPO, the proposed pilot study aims to further test the acceptability and feasibility of TEMPO.MethodsThis study is a multicenter, stratified, parallel, two-group, pilot randomized control trial (RCT), where patient-caregiver dyads are randomized (stratified by anxiety level) to receive (a) TEMPO or (b) usual care. Participants (n goal = 40) are recruited across Canada at participating cancer centers and through self-referral (e.g., online recruitment). Patient inclusion criteria are (a) having received prostate cancer treatment within the past 2 years or scheduled to receive treatment, (b) identified a primary caregiver willing to participate in the study, and (c) has access to the Internet. Eligible caregivers are those identified by the patient as his primary source of support. Dyads complete a baseline questionnaire (T1) and another one 3 months later (T2) assessing various aspects of physical and emotional functioning (e.g., the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS)), self-management behaviors (e.g., the Health Education Impact Questionnaire (heiQ)), physical activity (the International Physical Activity Questionnaires (IPAQ) and the Multidimensional Self-efficacy for Exercise Scale (MSES)), and dyadic coping (the Dyadic Coping Inventory (DCI)). Dyads that used TEMPO are also asked to participate in a semi-structured exit interview exploring their overall experience with the program.DiscussionThis feasibility analysis will begin to develop the knowledge base on TEMPO's value for men with prostate cancer and their caregivers to inform a larger trial.Trial registrationNCT04304196.

Project description:BackgroundMost of patients with dementia are cared for by family members. Caring for people with dementia is challenging; approximately 30-55% of caregivers suffered from anxiety or depressive symptoms. A range of studies have shown that psychosocial interventions are effective and can improve caregivers' quality of life, reduce their care burden, and ease their anxiety or depressive symptoms. However, information on the acceptability of these interventions, despite being crucial, is under-reported.MethodsSystematic searches of databases were conducted for literature published on EMBASE, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PsycARTICLES until August 2017 and the searches were updated on June 2018. The selection criteria included primary studies with data about the acceptability of psychosocial interventions for informal caregivers and publications written in English. Two authors independently selected studies, extracted study characteristics and data, assessed the methodological quality of the included studies by using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) Quality Assessment Tool and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Qualitative Research Checklist, and conducted a narrative synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data.ResultsA total of 10,610 abstracts were identified through systematic searches. Based on screening titles and abstracts, 207 papers were identified that met the criteria for full paper review, with 42 papers from 13 different countries meeting the inclusion criteria. We found high- and moderate-quality evidence showing psychosocial interventions were acceptable, with important benefits for caregivers. Facilitators of acceptability included caregivers' need for intervention, appropriate content and organization of the intervention, and knowledge and professionalism of the staff. Barriers to acceptability included participants' poor health status and low education levels, caregiving burden, change of intervention implementers, and poor system performance of interventions.ConclusionThere is preliminary evidence to support the acceptability of psychosocial interventions for dementia caregivers. However, the available supporting evidence is limited, and there is currently no adequate information from these studies indicating that the acceptability has received enough attention from researchers. More well-designed studies assessing psychosocial interventions are needed to give specific statements about acceptability, and the measure of acceptability with psychosocial interventions should be more comprehensive.

Project description:ObjectiveTo identify validated dermatology-specific and disease-specific psychosocial needs assessment tools for caregivers of paediatric patients with dermatological conditions. A secondary objective was to assess the adequacy of their measurement properties.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesEMBASE, PsycINFO, MEDLINE (in Ovid SP), Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health EBSCO, U Search and Web of Science were searched (2000-5 October 2021). Grey literature, bibliographies, online databases of QoL tools and several trial registers were searched (2000-5 Oct 2021).Eligibility criteriaEligible studies involved adult caregivers caring for a child (no age limit) with any form of any skin condition. Predetermined exclusion criteria, as per protocol, were applied to the search results.Data abstraction and synthesisTitle, abstract, full-text screening and data abstraction (standardised forms) were done independently in duplicate. Both's predefined methodological criteria assessed risk of bias. Narrative synthesis was used to present the findings.Results187 full-text articles were examined from a total of 8979 records. Most tools were generic QoL tools, relevant to spouse/partner or based on their child's perception of the disease or assessed patients' quality of life. Following quality appraisal, 26 articles were identified, and 11 tools (1 dermatology-specific and 10 disease-specific) were included. Information outcome domains were provided for each tool (study specific, questionnaire specific, adequacy of measurement properties and risk of bias). No literature was found pertaining to the use of these tools within healthcare settings and/or as e-tools.DiscussionWith limited evidence supporting the quality of their methodological and measurement properties, this review will inform future dermatological Core Outcome Set development and improve evidence-based clinical decisions. Increasing demand on limited healthcare resources justifies the codevelopment of an accessible solution-focused psychosocial needs assessment e-tool to promote caregiver health outcomes.Prospero registration numberPROSPERO (CRD42019159956).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Dyadic psychosocial interventions have been found beneficial both for people coping with mental or physical health conditions as well as their family members and friends who provide them with support. Delivering these interventions via electronic health (eHealth) may help increase their scalability. OBJECTIVE:This scoping review aimed to provide the first comprehensive overview of dyadic eHealth interventions for individuals of all ages affected by mental or physical illness and their family members or friends who support them. The goal was to understand how dyadic eHealth interventions have been used and to highlight areas of research needed to advance dyadic eHealth intervention development and dissemination. METHODS:A comprehensive electronic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycINFO was conducted for articles published in the English language through March 2019. Eligible records described a psychosocial eHealth intervention that intervened with both care recipients and their support person. RESULTS:A total of 7113 records were reviewed of which 101 met eligibility criteria. There were 52 unique dyadic eHealth interventions identified, which were tested across 73 different trials. Of the unique interventions, 33 were conducted among dyads of children and their supporting parent, 1 was conducted with an adolescent-young adult care recipient population, and the remaining 18 were conducted among adult dyads. Interventions targeting pediatric dyads most commonly addressed a mental health condition (n=10); interventions targeting adult dyads most commonly addressed cancer (n=9). More than three-fourths of interventions (n=40) required some human support from research staff or clinicians. Most studies (n=64) specified one or more primary outcomes for care recipients, whereas less than one-fourth (n=22) specified primary outcomes for support persons. Where specified, primary outcomes were most commonly self-reported psychosocial or health factors for both care recipients (n=43) and support persons (n=18). Results of the dyadic eHealth intervention tended to be positive for care recipients, but evidence of effects for support persons was limited because of few studies specifying primary outcomes for supporters. Trials of dyadic eHealth interventions were most commonly randomized controlled trials (RCTs; n=44), and RCTs most commonly compared the dyadic eHealth intervention to usual care alone (n=22). CONCLUSIONS:This first comprehensive review of dyadic eHealth interventions demonstrates that there is substantial, diverse, and growing literature supporting this interventional approach. However, several significant gaps were identified. Few studies were designed to evaluate the unique effects of dyadic interventions relative to individual interventions. There was also limited assessment and reporting of outcomes for support persons, and there were no interventions meeting our eligibility criteria specifically targeting the needs of older adult dyads. Findings highlight areas of research opportunities for developing dyadic eHealth interventions for novel populations and for increasing access to dyadic care.

Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to examine the usage, acceptability, usability, perceived usefulness, and satisfaction of a web-based video-tailored physical activity (PA) intervention (TaylorActive) in adults.MethodsIn 2013-2014, 501 Australian adults aged 18+ years were randomized into a video-tailored intervention, text-tailored intervention, or control group. Over 3 months, the intervention groups received access to 8 sessions of personally tailored PA advice delivered via the TaylorActive website. Only the delivery method differed between the intervention groups: video-tailored vs. text-tailored. Google Analytics and telephone surveys conducted at post intervention (3 months) were used to assess intervention usage, acceptability, usability, perceived usefulness, and satisfaction. Quantitative and qualitative process data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic content analysis.ResultsOf 501 recruited adults, 259 completed the 3-month post-intervention survey (52% retention). Overall, usage of the TaylorActive website with respect to number of website visits, intervention sessions, and action plans completed was modest in both the video-tailored (7.6 ± 7.2 visits, mean ± SD) and text-tailored (7.3 ± 5.4 visits) groups with no significant between-group differences. The majority of participants in all groups used the TaylorActive website less than once in 2 weeks (66.7% video-tailored, 62.7% text-tailored, 87.5% control; p < 0.001). Acceptability was rated mostly high in all groups and, in some instances, significantly higher in the intervention groups compared to the control group (p < 0.010). Usability was also rated high; mean Systems Usability Scores were 77.3 (video-tailored), 75.7 (text-tailored), and 74.1 (control) with no significant between-group differences. Perceived usefulness of the TaylorActive intervention was low, though mostly rated higher in the intervention groups compared to the control group (p < 0.010). Satisfaction with the TaylorActive website was mixed. Participants in both intervention groups liked its ease of use, personalized feedback, and tracking of progress, but also found completing action plans and survey questions for each session repetitive and tedious.ConclusionProviding personally tailored PA advice on its own (through either video or text) is likely insufficient to ensure good retention, usage, perceived usefulness, and satisfaction with a web-based PA intervention. Strategies to address this may include the incorporation of additional intervention components such as activity trackers, social interactions, gamification, as well as the use of advanced artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies to allow more personalized dialogue with participants.

Project description:BackgroundMore than 135 million people worldwide live with acquired brain injury (ABI) and its many psychosocial sequelae. This growing global burden necessitates scalable rehabilitation services. Despite demonstrated potential to increase the accessibility and scalability of psychosocial supports, digital health interventions are challenging to implement and sustain. The Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework can offer developers and researchers a comprehensive overview of considerations to implement, scale, and sustain digital health interventions.ObjectiveThis systematic review identified published, peer-reviewed primary evidence of implementation outcomes, strategies, and factors for web-based psychosocial interventions targeting either adults with ABI or their formal or informal caregivers; evaluated and summarized this evidence; synthesized qualitative and quantitative implementation data according to the NASSS framework; and provided recommendations for future implementation. Results were compared with 3 hypotheses which state that complexity (dynamic, unpredictable, and poorly characterized factors) in most or all NASSS domains increases likelihood of implementation failure; success is achievable, but difficult with many complicated domains (containing multiple interacting factors); and simplicity (straightforward, predictable, and few factors) in most or all domains increases the likelihood of success.MethodsFrom a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, speechBITE, and neuroBITE, we reviewed primary implementation evidence from January 2008 to June 2020. For web-based psychosocial interventions delivered via standard desktop computer, mobile phone, tablet, television, and virtual reality devices to adults with ABI or their formal or informal caregivers, we extracted intervention characteristics, stakeholder involvement, implementation scope and outcomes, study design and quality, and implementation data. Implementation data were both narratively synthesized and descriptively quantified across all 7 domains (condition, technology, value proposition, adopters, organization, wider system, and their interaction over time) and all subdomains of the NASSS framework. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the 2018 Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.ResultsWe identified 60 peer-reviewed studies from 12 countries, including 5723 adults with ABI, 1920 carers, and 50 health care staff. The findings aligned with all 3 hypotheses.ConclusionsAlthough studies were of low methodological quality and insufficient number to statistically test relationships, the results appeared consistent with recommendations to reduce complexity as much as possible to facilitate implementation. Although studies excluded individuals with a range of comorbidities and sociocultural challenges, such simplification of NASSS domain 1 may have been necessary to advance intervention value propositions (domain 3). However, to create equitable digital health solutions that can be successfully implemented in real-world settings, it is recommended that developers involve people with ABI, their close others, and health care staff in addressing complexities in domains 2 to 7 from the earliest intervention design stages.Trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020186387; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020186387.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.1177/20552076211035988.