MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.2196/55746

Медицинская библиотека · JMIR cancer · 2025

Exploring Motives Behind Ideal Melanoma Survivorship Care Plans With Multiple Stakeholders: A Cocreation Study.

Kamminga Nadia Christina Willemina, Lugtenberg Marjolein, Van den Broek Julia Annabel, Nijsten Tamar, Wakkee Marlies, Tabeau Kasia

СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Survivorship care plans (SCPs), ie, personalized health care plans for cancer survivors, can be used to support the growing group of melanoma survivors throughout their disease trajectory. However, implementation and effectiveness of SCPs are suboptimal and could benefit from the involvement of stakeholders in developing a user-centered design.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify the ideal SCP for patients with melanoma in terms of functions and features to be included according to different stakeholders and to explore their underlying motives.

METHODS

In total, 3 cocreation sessions were organized with mixed samples of stakeholders, ie, patients with (a history of) melanoma (n=4), health care providers (HCPs) active in melanoma care (n=3), and IT specialists active in hospital IT departments (n=6). They were invited to compose their ideal melanoma SCP based on potential functions and features identified from prior qualitative research. These functions and features belonged to one of the four main categories of survivorship care (SSC): (1) information and education, (2) identification and treatment, (3) oncological follow-up, and (4) coordination. Participants were invited to explain their motives for including functions and features. Ideas were shared between stakeholders, and interaction was promoted. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the ideal SCP per stakeholder group. To analyze underlying motives, all cocreation sessions were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed in a thematic content analysis.

RESULTS

With regard to their ideal SCPs, all stakeholders added functions from all 4 SSC categories. Patients assembled a rather compact SCP with category 2 on identification and treatment being most important. Both HCPs and IT professionals constructed a somewhat larger SCP, with category 3 on oncological follow-up being the most important aspect and HCPs also focusing on category 4 on coordination. As for the motives behind their ideal SCP compositions, patients predominantly added functions based on their personal experiences or experiences from fellow patients, whereas both HCPS and IT professionals based their compositions primarily on their respective areas of expertise: HCPs related their additions to their roles as medical practitioners; for example, in providing a complete treatment plan and obtaining informed consent, while IT professionals' contributions were mainly influenced by feasibility and privacy concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

This cocreation study provides insights into stakeholders' ideal melanoma SCP and the motivations behind them. Considering the diversity in both the preferences and underlying motives regarding SCP composition between patients, HCPs, and IT specialists, it is crucial to develop a broad SCP that extends beyond traditional SCP content, emphasizing personalization. In addition to continued stakeholder involvement, efforts should be focused on addressing potential feasibility and privacy issues to ensure the SCP meets both patients' and HCPs' needs.

Для цитирования: Kamminga Nadia Christina Willemina, Lugtenberg Marjolein, Van den Broek Julia Annabel, Nijsten Tamar, Wakkee Marlies, Tabeau Kasia. Exploring Motives Behind Ideal Melanoma Survivorship Care Plans With Multiple Stakeholders: A Cocreation Study.. JMIR cancer. 2025. DOI: 10.2196/55746.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.