Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Interactive technologies and videotapes for patient education in cancer care: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Goals of work

Patients diagnosed with cancer need education as they face complex decisions. There is limited evidence about the impact of new educational technologies for cancer patients. This paper investigates whether interactive technologies and videotapes for patient education in cancer care improve knowledge, satisfaction or other outcomes.

Methods

Literature search of five computerised databases (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System, Excerpta Medica Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) and bibliography searches identified relevant randomized controlled trials. Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality. Summary effects for knowledge and satisfaction were calculated using random-effects models (RevMan 4.2 software). Continuous data were summarised as weighted mean differences and dichotomous data as odds ratios, each with their respective 95% confidence interval. Standardised effect sizes for these outcomes were calculated and contrasted.

Results

Nine randomised control trials with 1,678 patients were identified. Three evaluated the use of videotapes, and six evaluated computer technologies. Studies were of good-quality design but were variable in instruments, content, populations, outcomes and results. Educational technologies showed improved patient knowledge (effect sizes ranging from 0.12 to 1.03). Satisfaction was improved in some studies, but the overall effect was more equivocal—effect sizes ranged (0.05 to 0.40) of benefit for knowledge and from 0 to 0.40 for satisfaction.

Conclusions

The trials present preliminary evaluations of the technology in North America, the UK and Australia. There is a trend to improved knowledge and satisfaction. The ways in which the interventions are delivered and the extent of communication with a health professional affect patient responses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ader DH, Seibring AR, Bhaskar P, Melamed BG (1992) Information seeking and interactive videodisc preparation for third molar extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 50:27–31

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Agre P, Kurtz R, Krauss B (1994) A randomised trial using videotape to present consent information for colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 40(3):271–276

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bartlett EE, Grayson M, Barker R (1984) The effects of physician communication skills on patient satisfaction, recall and adherence. J Chronic Dis 37:765–772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brown RF, Butow PN, Sharrock MA, Henman M, Boyle F, Goldstein D et al (2004) Education and role modelling for clinical decisions with female cancer patients. Health Expect 7(4):303–316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cassileth BR, Zupkis RV, Sutton-Smith K, March V (1980) Informed consent—why are its goals imperfectly realised? Ann Intern Med 92:832–836

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Coulter A, Entwistle V, Gilbert D (1999) Sharing decisions with patients: is the information good enough? Br Med J 318:318–322

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Fallowfield LJ, Hall A, Maguire GP, Baum M (1990) Psychological outcomes of different treatment policies in women with early breast cancer outside a clinical trial. Br Med J 301:575–580

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gustafson DH, Hawkins R, Pingree S, McTavish F, Arora NK, Mendenhall J et al (2001) Effect of computer support on younger women with breast cancer. J Gen Intern Med 16(435):445

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hughes KK (1993) Decision making by patients with breast cancer: the role of information in treatment selection. Oncol Nurs Forum 20:623–628

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Jones R, Pearson J, McGregor J (1999) Cross-sectional survey of patients satisfaction with information about cancer. Br Med J 319:1247–1248

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Jones R, Pearson J, McGregor S, Cawsey J, Barrett A, Craig N et al (1999) Randomised trial of personalised computer based information for cancer patients. Br Med J 319:1241–1247

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Maslin AM, Baum M, Walker JS, A’Hearn R, Prouse A (1998) Using an interactive video disk in breast cancer patient support. Nurs Times 94(44):52–55

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Meredith C, Symonds P, Webster L (1996) Information needs of cancer patients in the west of Scotland: cross-sectional survey of patients’ views. Br Med J 313:724–726

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Mills ME, Sullivan K (1999) The importance of information giving for patients newly diagnosed with cancer: a review of the literature. J Clin Nurs 8:631–642

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Molenaar S, Sprangers MA, Postma-Schuit FC (2000) Feasibility and effects of decision aids. Med Decis Making 20:112–127

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Morris J, Ingham R (1988) Choice of surgery for early breast cancer: psychosocial considerations. Soc Sci Med 27:1257–1262

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. National Cancer Alliance (1996) Patient-centred cancer services? What patients say. National Cancer Alliance, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  18. O’Connor A, Fiset V, DeGrasse C, Graham I, Evans W, Stacey D et al (1999) Decision aids for patients considering options affecting cancer outcomes: evidence of efficacy and policy implications. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 25:67–80

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. O’Connor AM, Rostom A, Fiset V, Tetroe J, Entwistle V, Llewellyn-Thomas H et al (1999) Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review. Br Med J 319:731–734

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Rinck G, Van den Bos G, Kleijnen J, de Haes H, Schade E, Veenhof C (1997) Methodologic issues in effectiveness research on palliative cancer care: a systematic review. J Clin Oncol 15(4):1697–1707

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Russell I, Di Blasi Z, Lambert M, Russell D (1998) Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: opportunities and threats. In: Templeton AA, O’Brien PMS (eds) Evidence-based fertility treatment. RCOG, London

    Google Scholar 

  22. Shaw M, Beebe T, Tomshine P, Adlis S, Oliver W (2001) A randomized controlled trial of interactive, multimedia software for patient colonoscopy education. J Clin Gastroenterol 32(2):142–147

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Slavin RE (1995) Best evidence synthesis: an intelligent alternative to meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 48:9–18

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Steward MA (1995) Effective physician–patient communication and health outcomes: a review. Can Med Assoc J 152:1423–1433

    Google Scholar 

  25. Street RL, Voight B, Geyer C, Manning T, Swanson GP (1995) Increasing patient involvement in choosing treatment for early breast cancer. Cancer 76(11):2275–2285

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Thomas R, Daly M, Perryman B, Stockton D (2000) Forewarned is forearmed—benefits of preparatory information on videocassette for patients receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy—a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Cancer 36:1536–1543

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Whelan T, Sawka C, Levine M, Gafni A, Reyno L, Willan A et al (2003) Helping patients make informed choices: a randomised trial of a decision aid for adjuvant chemotherapy in lymph node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 95(8):581–587

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. World Health Organisation/UICC (2003) Global action against cancer. World Health Organisation/UICC, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) funded the initial reviews for this work. This review was undertaken with the support of The Cicely Saunders Foundation (TCSF).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, King’s College London School of Medicine at Guy’s, King’s College and St Thomas’ Hospitals, London, UK

    Marjolein Gysels & Irene J. Higginson

  2. Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK

    Marjolein Gysels

Authors
  1. Marjolein Gysels
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Irene J. Higginson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marjolein Gysels.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gysels, M., Higginson, I.J. Interactive technologies and videotapes for patient education in cancer care: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. Support Care Cancer 15, 7–20 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-006-0112-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-006-0112-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation