Cited by 40Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsCancer survivorship and careDigital Mental Health Interventions

An mHealth Pain Coping Skills Training Intervention for Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Patients: Development and Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Somers, Tamara J, Kelleher, Sarah A, Dorfman, Caroline S, Shelby, Rebecca A, Fisher, Hannah M, Rowe Nichols, Krista, Sullivan, Keith M, Chao, Nelson J +3 more·2018·JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pain is a challenge for patients following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and test the feasibility, acceptability, and initial efficacy of a Web-based mobile pain coping skills training (mPCST) protocol designed to address the needs of HCT patients. METHODS: Participants had undergone HCT and reported pain following transplant (N=68). To guide intervention development, qualitative data were collected from focus group participants (n=25) and participants who completed user testing (n=7). After their input was integrated into the mPCST intervention, a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT, n=36) was conducted to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and initial efficacy of the intervention. Measures of acceptability, pain severity, pain disability, pain self-efficacy, fatigue, and physical disability (self-report and 2-min walk test [2MWT]) were collected. RESULTS: Participants in the focus groups and user testing provided qualitative data that were used to iteratively refine the mPCST protocol. Focus group qualitative data included participants' experiences with pain following transplant, perspectives on ways to cope with pain, and suggestions for pain management for other HCT patients. User testing participants provided feedback on the HCT protocol and information on the use of videoconferencing. The final version of the mPCST intervention was designed to bridge the intensive outpatient (1 in-person session) and home settings (5 videoconferencing sessions). A key component of the intervention was a website that provided personalized messages based on daily assessments of pain and activity. The website also provided intervention materials (ie, electronic handouts, short videos, and audio files). The intervention content included pain coping advice from other transplant patients and instructions on how to apply pain coping skills while engaging in meaningful and leisure activities. In the RCT phase of this research, HCT patients (n=36) were randomized to receive the mPCST intervention or to proceed with the treatment as usual. Results revealed that the mPCST participants completed an average of 5 out of 6 sessions. The participants reported that the intervention was highly acceptable (mean 3/4), and they found the sessions to be helpful (mean 8/10) and easy to understand (mean 7/7). The mPCST participants demonstrated significant improvements in pre- to post-treatment pain, self-efficacy (P=.03, d=0.61), and on the 2MWT (P=.03, d=0.66), whereas the patients in the treatment-as-usual group did not report any such improvements. Significant changes in pain disability and fatigue were found in both groups (multiple P<.02); the magnitudes of the effect sizes were larger for the mPCST group than for the control group (pain disability: d=0.79 vs 0.69; fatigue: d=0.94 vs 0.81). There were no significant changes in pain severity in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Using focus groups and user testing, we developed an mPCST protocol that was feasible, acceptable, and beneficial for HCT patients with pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01984671; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01984671 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6xbpx3clZ).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/mhealth.8565

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Somers, T. J., Kelleher, S. A., Dorfman, C. S., Shelby, R. A., Fisher, H. M., Rowe Nichols, K., Sullivan, K. M., Chao, N. J., Samsa, G. P., Abernethy, A. P., & Keefe, F. J.
Affiliations
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Somers, Tamara J
Venue
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Published
2018-03-19
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
e66
ISSN
2291-5222 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2792948205
Cited by
40
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1
FWCI
7.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR mhealth and uhealth (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (R21CA173307)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, pain coping skills training, mobile health intervention, online intervention, videoconferencing, pain self-efficacy, pain-related disability, fatigue, physical disability, personalized messages, feasibility and acceptability, intervention development, patient perspectives, 2-minute walk test

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