Ability of the intervention to meet patient needs [recipient characteristics]
fatigue, nausea, sleeplessness, depressive symptoms
Stakeholders’ perceptions of the intervention were tightly linked to whether they thought this approach to care would benefit patients. ePROM administration was perceived to potentially help manage patients’ symptoms, particularly in between visits. However, stakeholders worried about lack of enhanced processes for addressing patients’ symptoms reported during the usual care phase, particularly if patients reported depressive symptoms prior to their practice starting the intervention phase of the trial. Stakeholders were also concerned about patient care implications if the work of the SCMs overlapped with that of members of the care team (e.g., the clinical team would manage treatment-related nausea, but SCMs would manage sleeplessness and fatigue). They also questioned whether the self-management materials were patient-centered and thought patients might have difficulty using them:We’re talking a 20-plus page booklet that they’re gonna have to work through to identify what interventions or management tips they should try. They have to first identify their symptom. They have to know which symptoms to try and how that relates to them. (P7; Enterprise Education Staff [develops patient education])However, the availability of self-management materials in different formats (e.g., articles, videos) was perceived favorably to address different learning styles. Stakeholders noted the importance of understanding each individual patient’s needs, including symptoms, psychosocial needs, level of digital literacy, and broadband access. One stakeholder noted, “Not everyone, especially some of our more rural patients, have computer access on a ready basis.” (P12; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Physician)