Cited by 10Cancer survivorship and carePain Management and Opioid UseHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

Implementation of a mobile inpatient quality of life (QoL) assessment for oncology nursing

Schuler, Markus K., Trautmann, Freya, Radloff, Mirko, Schmädig, Roman, Hentschel, Leopold, Eberlein-Gonska, Maria, Petzold, Thomas, Vetter, Heike +3 more·2016·Supportive Care in Cancer

Abstract

Purpose Cancer patients suffer from a variety of symptoms, but little is known about changes during hospitalization and symptom burden at discharge. We implemented an electronic quality of life (QoL) assessment used by the nursing team in routine inpatient care. Feasibility, acceptance, and the course of QoL were investigated. Methods A self-administered electronic questionnaire based on the EQ-5D and the EORTC QLQ-C30 was applied in clinical routine. Cancer patients were approached by the nursing staff to complete the QoL assessment twice, at admission and at the day of discharge. Both the feedback of the nursing staff as well as characteristics of participants were used to evaluate the electronic assessment. Results Out of 210 patients from an oncologic ward, 85 patients (40 %) were invited to participate, 95 % of whom (n = 81) agreed to participate. Participation rate depended on the day of admission, the presence of the coordinating nurse, the overall morbidity assessed by patient clinical complexity level, and the patient age. Forty-six patients (56 %) asked for assistance in completing the questionnaire. Patients older than 53 years and male patients were more likely to need assistance. Twenty-two percent of the nursing staff (n = 5) use the information assessed for individual patient care. Fifty-two percent (n = 12) rated the additional workload as very little or little and 68 % (n = 15) agreed that handling for the patient was easy. Global QoL improved during the stay…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00520-016-3163-9

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schuler, M. K., Trautmann, F., Radloff, M., Schmädig, R., Hentschel, L., Eberlein-Gonska, M., Petzold, T., Vetter, H., Oberlack, S., Ehninger, G., & Schmitt, J.
Affiliations
  • University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus (DE)
  • National Center for Tumor Diseases (DE)
  • Zentrum für Evidenzbasierte Gesundheitsversorgung (DE)
Corresponding author
Hentschel, Leopold
Venue
Supportive Care in Cancer
Published
2016-03-16
Volume
24
Issue
8
Pages
3391-3399
ISSN
  • 0941-4355 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-7339
OpenAlex
W2297302874
Cited by
10
References
3
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4
FWCI
0.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Supportive Care in Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
quality of life, cancer patients, inpatient care, oncology nursing, electronic questionnaires, EQ-5D, EORTC QLQ-C30, symptom burden, discharge, feasibility, nursing workload, patient support, fatigue, pain, insomnia, appetite loss
MeSH terms
Aged, Female, Patient Care, Humans, Inpatients, Male, Middle Aged, Oncology Nursing, Pilot Projects, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Internet, Mobile Applications

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review