IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i18p11773-d918142.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Web-Based Patient-Reported Outcomes for ENT Patients—Evaluation of the Status Quo, Patients’ View, and Future Perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Theresa Wald

    (Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Leipzig Medical Centre, 04103 Leipzig, Germany
    These authors contributed equally to this work and share first authorship.)

  • Veit Zebralla

    (Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Leipzig Medical Centre, 04103 Leipzig, Germany
    These authors contributed equally to this work and share first authorship.)

  • Maren Boege

    (Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Leipzig Medical Centre, 04103 Leipzig, Germany)

  • Viktor Kunz

    (Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Leipzig Medical Centre, 04103 Leipzig, Germany)

  • Thomas Neumuth

    (Innovation Center Computer Assisted Surgery, University of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany)

  • Andreas Dietz

    (Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Leipzig Medical Centre, 04103 Leipzig, Germany)

  • Gunnar Wichmann

    (Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Leipzig Medical Centre, 04103 Leipzig, Germany
    These authors contributed equally to this work and share senior authorship.)

  • Susanne Wiegand

    (Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Leipzig Medical Centre, 04103 Leipzig, Germany
    These authors contributed equally to this work and share senior authorship.)

Abstract

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) assess disease burden and indicate unmet needs. Home-based electronic PRO measures (ePROMs) can support tumor aftercare (TAC). Creating an ePROM is the next step after implementing the software “OncoFunction” to assess PROs during TAC of head- and neck-cancer patients (HNC). Therefore, internet use and perception on ePROMs of ENT and TAC patients were evaluated. Methods: From May–July 2020, ENT patients at a high-volume outpatient department aged >18 without need for emergency treatment were invited to complete a questionnaire concerning internet use and access, hardware, and opinion on the chances, requirements, and designs of ePROMs. Results: 415 questionnaires were evaluated; 46.3% of the respondents visited the common consultation hour (CCH) and 44.3% TAC; 71.9% were internet users, being younger than non-internet users; and 36.4% of TAC patients were non-internet users and 16.3% of them were without a web-enabled device. Significant differences existed in age and assessment of future perspectives between internet-/non-internet users and TAC/CCH patients, respectively. Regarding the design of ePROMs, patients preferred quarterly and short surveys. Data safety and feedback were important. Conclusions: ePROMs are not suitable for everyone because of missing internet access and experience. A tailored approach to implement ePROMs in TAC is needed.

Suggested Citation

  • Theresa Wald & Veit Zebralla & Maren Boege & Viktor Kunz & Thomas Neumuth & Andreas Dietz & Gunnar Wichmann & Susanne Wiegand, 2022. "Web-Based Patient-Reported Outcomes for ENT Patients—Evaluation of the Status Quo, Patients’ View, and Future Perspectives," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-16, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:18:p:11773-:d:918142
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/18/11773/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/18/11773/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:18:p:11773-:d:918142. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.