Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Oct 26;22(10):e21238.
doi: 10.2196/21238.

Development and Evaluation of a Digital Intervention for Fulfilling the Needs of Older Migrant Patients With Cancer: User-Centered Design Approach

Affiliations

Development and Evaluation of a Digital Intervention for Fulfilling the Needs of Older Migrant Patients With Cancer: User-Centered Design Approach

Hande Sungur et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Older migrant patients with cancer face many language- and culture-related barriers to patient participation during medical consultations. To bridge these barriers, an eHealth tool called Health Communicator was developed in the Netherlands. Essentially used as a digital translator that can collect medical history information from patients, the Health Communicator did not include an oncological module so far, despite the fact that the prevalence of Dutch migrant patients with cancer is rising.

Objective: This study aims to systematically develop, implement, and conduct a pilot evaluation of an oncological module that can be integrated into the Health Communicator to stimulate patient participation among older Turkish-Dutch and Moroccan-Dutch patients with cancer.

Methods: The Spiral Technology Action Research model, which incorporates 5 cycles that engage key stakeholders in intervention development, was used as a framework. The listen phase consisted of a needs assessment. The plan phase consisted of developing the content of the oncological module, namely the question prompt lists (QPLs) and scripts for patient education videos. On the basis of pretests in the do phase, 6 audiovisual QPLs on patient rights, treatment, psychosocial support, lifestyle and access to health care services, patient preferences, and clinical trials were created. Additionally, 5 patient education videos were created about patient rights, psychosocial support, clinical trials, and patient-professional communication. In the study phase, the oncological module was pilot-tested among 27 older Turkish-Dutch and Moroccan-Dutch patients with cancer during their consultations. In the act phase, the oncological model was disseminated to practice.

Results: The patient rights QPL was chosen most often during the pilot testing in the study phase. Patients and health care professionals perceived the QPLs as easy to understand and useful. There was a negative correlation between the tool's ease of use and patient age. Patients reported that using the module impacted the consultations positively and thought they were more active compared with previous consultations. Health care professionals also found patients to be more active than usual. Health care professionals asked significantly more questions than patients during consultations. Patients requested to see the patients' rights video most often. Patients rated the videos as easy to understand, useful, and informative. Most of the patients wanted to use the tool in the future.

Conclusions: Older migrant patients with cancer, survivors, and health care professionals found the oncological module to be a useful tool and have shown intentions to incorporate it into future consultation sessions. Both QPLs and videos were evaluated positively, the latter indicating that the use of narratives to inform older, low-literate migrant patients with cancer about health-related topics in their mother tongue is a viable approach to increase the effectiveness of health care communication with this target group.

Keywords: cancer; culture; eHealth; health services needs and demand; migrants; mobile phone; patient participation; physician-patient relations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Breakdown of question prompt lists selected by the patients in the evaluation study. Percentages reflect the percentage of participants that selected that question prompt list. Among the 27 participants, 10 selected 1 and 17 selected 2 question prompt lists. QPLs: question prompt lists.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Videos selected by the patients. Percentages reflect the percentage of participants that selected that video. 33% of patients selected 1 video, 22% selected 2 videos, 4% selected 3 videos, 19% selected 4 videos, and 11% selected 5 videos, amounting to an average of 2.27 (SD 1.59) videos requested per patient. GP: general practitioner.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Butow P, Bell M, Goldstein D, Sze M, Aldridge L, Abdo S, Mikhail M, Dong S, Iedema R, Ashgari R, Hui R, Eisenbruch M. Grappling with cultural differences; communication between oncologists and immigrant cancer patients with and without interpreters. Patient Educ Couns. 2011 Sep;84(3):398–405. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.01.035. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ahmed S, Lee S, Shommu N, Rumana N, Turin T. Experiences of communication barriers between physicians and immigrant patients: a systematic review and thematic synthesis. Patient Experience Journal. 2017 Apr 24;4(1):122–40. doi: 10.35680/2372-0247.1181. - DOI
    1. Jacobs EA, Diamond L. Providing Health Care in the Context of Language Barriers: International Perspectives. New York, USA: Multilingual Matters; 2017.
    1. Akhavan S, Karlsen S. Practitioner and client explanations for disparities in health care use between migrant and non-migrant groups in Sweden: a qualitative study. J Immigr Minor Health. 2013 Feb;15(1):188–97. doi: 10.1007/s10903-012-9581-y. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jangland E, Gunningberg L, Carlsson M. Patients' and relatives' complaints about encounters and communication in health care: evidence for quality improvement. Patient Educ Couns. 2009 May;75(2):199–204. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.10.007. - DOI - PubMed