Electronic versus paper diaries: A pilot study of concordance and adherence in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiation therapy

8Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background. Interactive Voice Response Systems (IVRS) and other electronic data collection methods have begun to replace conventional paper diaries as a way to capture daily patient reports. However, these methods have not been compared in head and neck (H&N) cancer patients receiving radiation therapy. Methods. 15 subjects with H&N cancer were asked to complete daily IVRS calls and daily paper diaries during radiation therapy. We compared response consistency and comparative adherence across the two methods. Results. 86.1% (1920/2231) of participants' responses were consistent between IVRS and paper diaries. 79.5% of the expected number of paper diaries were completed, compared to 66.2% of IVRS phone calls. Conclusions. In this pilot study of H&N cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy, concordance was high between responses recorded by paper diaries and IVRS. Although adherence appeared to be higher for the paper diaries, it is possible that they may not have been completed at the proper time. © 2010 Blondin et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Blondin, J. M., Abu-Hasaballah, K. S., Tennen, H., & Lalla, R. V. (2010). Electronic versus paper diaries: A pilot study of concordance and adherence in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiation therapy. Head and Neck Oncology, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1758-3284-2-29

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free