Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Human Factors

Date Submitted: Jun 3, 2024
Date Accepted: Sep 23, 2024
Date Submitted to PubMed: Oct 24, 2024

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Oncology Clinicians' Perspectives of a Remote Patient Monitoring Program: Multi-Modal Case Study Approach

Mazzella-Ebstein AM, Daly R, Huang J, Bernal C, Wilhelm C, Panageas KS, Holland J, Salvaggio R, Ackerman J, Cracchiolo J, Kuperman G, Mao J, Begue A, Barton-Burke M

Oncology Clinicians' Perspectives of a Remote Patient Monitoring Program: Multi-Modal Case Study Approach

JMIR Hum Factors 2025;12:e60585

DOI: 10.2196/60585

PMID: 39446017

PMCID: 11811663

Oncology Clinicians' Perspectives of a Remote Patient Monitoring Program

  • Ann Marie Mazzella-Ebstein; 
  • Robert Daly; 
  • Jennie Huang; 
  • Camila Bernal; 
  • Clare Wilhelm; 
  • Katherine S. Panageas; 
  • Jessie Holland; 
  • Rori Salvaggio; 
  • Jill Ackerman; 
  • Jennifer Cracchiolo; 
  • Gilad Kuperman; 
  • Jun Mao; 
  • Aaron Begue; 
  • Margaret Barton-Burke

ABSTRACT

Background:

Remote patient monitoring (RPM) aims to improve patient access to care and communication with clinical providers. Overall, understanding the usability of RPM applications and their influence on clinical care workflows is limited from the perspectives of clinician end users at a cancer center in the Northeast, United States.

Objective:

Explore the usability and functionality of RPM and elicit the perceptions and experiences of oncology clinicians using RPM for oncology patients after hospital discharge.

Methods:

The sample included 30 of 98 clinicians (31% response rate) managing at least five patients in the RPM program and responding to the m-Health Usability between March 2021- October 2021. Overall, clinicians responded positively to the survey. Item responses with the highest proportion of disagreement were explored further. A nested sample of five clinicians who responded to the study survey (30% response rate) participated in interview sessions conducted from November 2021 to February 2022, and averaged 60 minutes each.

Results:

Survey responses highlighted that RPM was easy to use and learn and verified symptom alerts during follow-up phone calls. Areas to improve identified practice changes from reporting RPM alerts through digital portals and its influence on clinicians’ workload burden. Interview sessions revealed three main themes: clinician understanding and usability constraints, patient constraints, and suggestions for improving the program. Subthemes for each theme were explored, characterizing technical and functional limitations that could be addressed to enhance efficiency, workflow, and user experience.

Conclusions:

Clinicians support the value of RPM for improving symptom management and engaging with providers. Functional changes to enhance the program’s utility, such as input from patients about temporal changes in their symptoms and technical resources for home monitoring devices.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Mazzella-Ebstein AM, Daly R, Huang J, Bernal C, Wilhelm C, Panageas KS, Holland J, Salvaggio R, Ackerman J, Cracchiolo J, Kuperman G, Mao J, Begue A, Barton-Burke M

Oncology Clinicians' Perspectives of a Remote Patient Monitoring Program: Multi-Modal Case Study Approach

JMIR Hum Factors 2025;12:e60585

DOI: 10.2196/60585

PMID: 39446017

PMCID: 11811663

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.