Can the CANKADO online application improve quality of life monitoring via the endometriosis health profile-30 in endometriosis patients: A randomized cohort study on acceptance, usability, and correlations with demographics and media usage.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Lucia Ehmann, Maresa Jäger, Lina Folger, Timo Schinköthe, Susanne Beyer, Lennard Schröder, Sven Mahner, Thomas Kolben
{"title":"Can the CANKADO online application improve quality of life monitoring via the endometriosis health profile-30 in endometriosis patients: A randomized cohort study on acceptance, usability, and correlations with demographics and media usage.","authors":"Lucia Ehmann, Maresa Jäger, Lina Folger, Timo Schinköthe, Susanne Beyer, Lennard Schröder, Sven Mahner, Thomas Kolben","doi":"10.1186/s12905-025-03736-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The global increase in interest in endometriosis highlights the importance of further investigations concerning this so-called benign gynecological disease. Owing to their severe presentation of symptoms, patients suffer from an enormous impact on their health-related quality of life (HRQoL). While the paper-based assessment of quality of life via, e.g., the \"Endometriosis Health Profile-30 questionnaire (EHP-30)\" seems to be largely accepted and implemented, the electronic measurement of this patient-reported outcome (ePRO) is still rarely applied. This study aimed to analyze the acceptance and usability of electronic assessments of HRQoL in endometriosis patients via the online platform CANKADO.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study was conducted at the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics of LMU Munich between January 2022 and February 2023. Sixty conservatively treated patients with endometriosis were recruited for the randomized cohort study, followed by randomization due to their planned interrogation modality (n paper-based = 23, n online-based = 17). Afterwards, a HRQoL assessment via the EHP-30 questionnaire was performed. An evaluation of the interrogation modalities was performed at 0, 6 and 12 months. The metric or categorical variables were compared via Fisher's exact test or the Mann‒Whitney U test. Correlation analysis was performed by calculating the Kendall Tau coefficient or Eta coefficient.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty patients completed evaluation forms at T0 (0 months), with n = 23 evaluating the paper-based interrogation modality and n = 17 evaluating the online version. At all the time of assessment, more than 80% of the patients showed a positive response to routinely performed ePRO measurements in the clinical context, expecting simplified communication, faster diagnosis, and therapeutic improvement. The online modality was rated more suitably (T0: 72.7% vs. 76.5%; T3: 60.0% vs. 90.0%), less complex (T0: 59.1% vs. 76.5%; T3: 80.0% vs. 70.0%), and less laborious (T0: 72.7% vs. 70.6%; T3: 80% each). Completion time over ten minutes was significantly correlated with low coping ability (r = 0.530; p = 0.029), lower clarity (r = 0.530; p = 0.029) and greater effort (r = 0.593; p = 0.012).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings indicate high acceptance and usability of regularly performed ePRO assessments in patients with endometriosis via the online tool CANKADO.</p>","PeriodicalId":9204,"journal":{"name":"BMC Women's Health","volume":"25 1","pages":"205"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12036296/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Women's Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-025-03736-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The global increase in interest in endometriosis highlights the importance of further investigations concerning this so-called benign gynecological disease. Owing to their severe presentation of symptoms, patients suffer from an enormous impact on their health-related quality of life (HRQoL). While the paper-based assessment of quality of life via, e.g., the "Endometriosis Health Profile-30 questionnaire (EHP-30)" seems to be largely accepted and implemented, the electronic measurement of this patient-reported outcome (ePRO) is still rarely applied. This study aimed to analyze the acceptance and usability of electronic assessments of HRQoL in endometriosis patients via the online platform CANKADO.

Methods: The study was conducted at the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics of LMU Munich between January 2022 and February 2023. Sixty conservatively treated patients with endometriosis were recruited for the randomized cohort study, followed by randomization due to their planned interrogation modality (n paper-based = 23, n online-based = 17). Afterwards, a HRQoL assessment via the EHP-30 questionnaire was performed. An evaluation of the interrogation modalities was performed at 0, 6 and 12 months. The metric or categorical variables were compared via Fisher's exact test or the Mann‒Whitney U test. Correlation analysis was performed by calculating the Kendall Tau coefficient or Eta coefficient.

Results: Forty patients completed evaluation forms at T0 (0 months), with n = 23 evaluating the paper-based interrogation modality and n = 17 evaluating the online version. At all the time of assessment, more than 80% of the patients showed a positive response to routinely performed ePRO measurements in the clinical context, expecting simplified communication, faster diagnosis, and therapeutic improvement. The online modality was rated more suitably (T0: 72.7% vs. 76.5%; T3: 60.0% vs. 90.0%), less complex (T0: 59.1% vs. 76.5%; T3: 80.0% vs. 70.0%), and less laborious (T0: 72.7% vs. 70.6%; T3: 80% each). Completion time over ten minutes was significantly correlated with low coping ability (r = 0.530; p = 0.029), lower clarity (r = 0.530; p = 0.029) and greater effort (r = 0.593; p = 0.012).

Conclusions: The findings indicate high acceptance and usability of regularly performed ePRO assessments in patients with endometriosis via the online tool CANKADO.

CANKADO在线应用程序能否通过子宫内膜异位症患者的健康概况-30改善生活质量监测:一项关于可接受性、可用性以及与人口统计学和媒体使用相关性的随机队列研究。
背景:全球对子宫内膜异位症的兴趣增加,强调了进一步研究这种所谓的良性妇科疾病的重要性。由于症状严重,患者的健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)受到巨大影响。虽然基于纸张的生活质量评估,如“子宫内膜异位症健康概况-30问卷(EHP-30)”似乎被广泛接受和实施,但这种患者报告的结果(ePRO)的电子测量仍然很少应用。本研究旨在分析通过在线平台CANKADO对子宫内膜异位症患者HRQoL进行电子评估的可接受性和可用性。方法:研究于2022年1月至2023年2月在慕尼黑大学妇产科进行。我们招募了60名保守治疗的子宫内膜异位症患者进行随机队列研究,然后根据他们计划的询问方式进行随机化(n例基于纸质的= 23,n例基于在线的= 17)。随后,通过EHP-30问卷进行HRQoL评估。在第0、6和12个月时对审讯方式进行评估。度量变量或分类变量通过Fisher精确检验或Mann-Whitney U检验进行比较。通过计算Kendall Tau系数或Eta系数进行相关分析。结果:40例患者在T0(0个月)完成了评估表格,其中n = 23例评估纸质问询方式,n = 17例评估在线问询方式。在所有评估期间,超过80%的患者对临床常规ePRO测量表现出积极反应,期望简化沟通,更快诊断和治疗改善。网络方式被认为更合适(T0: 72.7% vs. 76.5%;T3: 60.0% vs. 90.0%),较不复杂(T0: 59.1% vs. 76.5%;T3: 80.0% vs. 70.0%),较不费力(T0: 72.7% vs. 70.6%;T3:各占80%)。完成时间超过10分钟与应对能力低下显著相关(r = 0.530;P = 0.029),清晰度较低(r = 0.530;P = 0.029)和更大的努力(r = 0.593;p = 0.012)。结论:研究结果表明,通过在线工具CANKADO对子宫内膜异位症患者定期进行ePRO评估具有较高的接受度和可用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Women's Health
BMC Women's Health OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
444
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Women''s Health is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the health and wellbeing of adolescent girls and women, with a particular focus on the physical, mental, and emotional health of women in developed and developing nations. The journal welcomes submissions on women''s public health issues, health behaviours, breast cancer, gynecological diseases, mental health and health promotion.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信