Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T23:35:21.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adult Co-morbidity Evaluation 27 scores of head and neck cancer patients using touch-screen technology: patient satisfaction and clinical verification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2017

C Brammer ,
D Dawson ,
M Joseph ,
J Tipper ,
T Jemmet ,
L Liew ,
C Spinou ,
N Grew ,
N Pigadas  and
K Rehman
C Brammer*
Affiliation:
Clatterbridge Cancer Centre, Clatterbridge
D Dawson
Affiliation:
Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals Trust, UK
M Joseph
Affiliation:
Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals Trust, UK
J Tipper
Affiliation:
Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals Trust, UK
T Jemmet
Affiliation:
Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals Trust, UK
L Liew
Affiliation:
Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals Trust, UK
C Spinou
Affiliation:
Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals Trust, UK
N Grew
Affiliation:
Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals Trust, UK
N Pigadas
Affiliation:
Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals Trust, UK
K Rehman
Affiliation:
Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals Trust, UK
*
Address for correspondence: Dr C Brammer, Clatterbridge Cancer Centre, Clatterbridge, Wirral CH63 4JY, UK E-mail: c.brammer@nhs.net
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives:

This study aimed to assess head and neck cancer patient satisfaction with the use of a touch-screen computer patient-completed questionnaire for assessing Adult Co-morbidity Evaluation 27 co-morbidity scores prior to treatment, along with its clinical reliability.

Methods:

A total of 96 head and neck cancer patients were included in the audit. An accurate Adult Co-morbidity Evaluation 27 co-morbidity score was achieved via patient-completed questionnaire assessment for 97 per cent of participants.

Results:

In all, 96 per cent of patients found the use of a touch-screen computer acceptable and would be willing to use one again, and 62 per cent would be willing to do so without help. Patients were more likely to be willing to use the computer again without help if they were aged 65 years or younger (χ2 test; p = 0.0054) or had a performance status of 0 or 1 (χ2 test; p = 0.00034).

Conclusion:

Use of a touch-screen computer is an acceptable approach for assessing Adult Co-morbidity Evaluation 27 scores at pre-treatment assessment in a multidisciplinary joint surgical–oncology clinic.

Keywords

ComorbidityHead and Neck NeoplasmsComputersHealth SurveysQuestionnaires
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 131 , Issue 5 , May 2017 , pp. 442 - 446
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Piccirillo, JF, Tierney, RM, Costas, I, Grove, L, Spitznagel, EL Jr. Prognostic importance of comorbidity in a hospital-based cancer registry. JAMA 2004;291:2441–7Google Scholar
2 National Head and Neck Cancer Audit 2013, DAHNO Ninth Annual Report. In: http://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB14257 [14 July 2014]Google Scholar
3 Paleri, V, Wright, RG. A cross-comparison of retrospective notes extraction and combined notes extraction and patient interview in the completion of a comorbidity index (ACE-27) in a cohort of United Kingdom patients with head and neck cancer. J Laryngol Otol 2002;116:937–41Google Scholar
4 Turgeon, TR, Petrak, M, Slobodian, L, Bohm, E. Touch screen technology improves data collection and efficiency in a high volume orthopaedic clinic. Orthopaedic Proceedings 2012;94(suppl XXXVIII):125 Google Scholar
5 Fann, JR, Berry, DL, Wolpin, S, Austin-Seymour, M, Bush, N, Halpenny, B et al. Depression screening using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 administered on touch screen computer. Psycooncology 2009;18:14–22 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6 Mackenzie, LJ, Carey, ML, Sanson-Fisher, RW. Agreement between HADS classification and single item screening question for anxiety and depression: a cross sectional survey of cancer patients. Ann Oncol 2014;25:889–95Google Scholar
7 Scott, B, Ghazali, N, Lowe, D, Bekiroglu, F, Rogers, SN. The patients concerns inventory in head and neck cancer: comparison between self-completed paper and touch screen versions in the clinic setting. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2013;17:863–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8 Flexen, J, Ghazali, N, Lowe, D. Identifying appearance related concerns in routine follow up clinics following treatment for oral and oropharyngeal cancer. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;50:314–20Google Scholar
9 de Bree, R, Verdonck-de Leeuw, IM, Keizer, AL, Houffelaar, A, Leemans, CR. Touch screen computer-assisted health-related quality of life and distress data collection in head and neck cancer patients. Clin Otolarygol 2008;33:138–42Google Scholar
10 Cnossen, IC, de Bree, R, Rinlet, RN, Eerenstein, SE, Rietveld, DH, Buter, et al. Computerized monitoring of patient reported speech and swallowing problems in head and neck cancer. Supportive Care Cancer 2012;20:2925–31Google Scholar
11 Wu, WW, Johnson, R, Schepp, KG, Karen, G. Electronic self reporting symptoms and quality of life for adolescent patients with cancer: a feasibility study. Cancer Nurs 2011;34:479–86Google Scholar