可穿戴技术在老年癌症患者研究中的应用:系统综述。

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Oncologist Pub Date : 2024-11-20 DOI:10.1093/oncolo/oyae319
Jan J Duin, Joosje C Baltussen, Gali Albalak, Eléonore F van Dam van Isselt, Johanneke E A Portielje, Simon P Mooijaart, Enrique Soto-Perez-de-Celis, Frederiek van den Bos
{"title":"可穿戴技术在老年癌症患者研究中的应用:系统综述。","authors":"Jan J Duin, Joosje C Baltussen, Gali Albalak, Eléonore F van Dam van Isselt, Johanneke E A Portielje, Simon P Mooijaart, Enrique Soto-Perez-de-Celis, Frederiek van den Bos","doi":"10.1093/oncolo/oyae319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the increasing integration of wearable technology in oncology, its application in the care of older adults, representing most patients with cancer, is poorly defined.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review aimed to summarize the current use of wearables in studies in older adults with cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Emcare, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library on May 1, 2024. Studies involving wearable devices and patients aged ≥60 years diagnosed with cancer were included. Outcomes reported were study characteristics, wearable outcomes, feasibility and adherence. The mixed method appraisal tool was used to assess the quality of included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 31 publications were included, comprising 1298 older patients. Of these, 12 were pilot/feasibility studies, 12 were observational studies, 6 were randomized controlled trials, and 1 was a cross-sectional study. Most studies used wearable data to measure recovery (19 studies, 61%). Physical activity was the most studied wearable outcome (27 studies, 87%). Adherence to the wearable device was documented in 11 of the 31 studies (35%), with adherence ranging from 74% to 100%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our systematic review found wearables were mostly used to measure physical activity, with the most common primary aim of measuring recovery. Most studies reported high adherence, although definitions of adherence were diverse. Our results highlight the need for more and larger studies on wearable technology in older cancer patients, the use of standardized reporting frameworks, and increased participation in research in low- and middle-income countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":54686,"journal":{"name":"Oncologist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The use of wearable technology in studies in older adults with cancer: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Jan J Duin, Joosje C Baltussen, Gali Albalak, Eléonore F van Dam van Isselt, Johanneke E A Portielje, Simon P Mooijaart, Enrique Soto-Perez-de-Celis, Frederiek van den Bos\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oncolo/oyae319\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the increasing integration of wearable technology in oncology, its application in the care of older adults, representing most patients with cancer, is poorly defined.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review aimed to summarize the current use of wearables in studies in older adults with cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Emcare, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library on May 1, 2024. Studies involving wearable devices and patients aged ≥60 years diagnosed with cancer were included. Outcomes reported were study characteristics, wearable outcomes, feasibility and adherence. The mixed method appraisal tool was used to assess the quality of included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 31 publications were included, comprising 1298 older patients. Of these, 12 were pilot/feasibility studies, 12 were observational studies, 6 were randomized controlled trials, and 1 was a cross-sectional study. Most studies used wearable data to measure recovery (19 studies, 61%). Physical activity was the most studied wearable outcome (27 studies, 87%). Adherence to the wearable device was documented in 11 of the 31 studies (35%), with adherence ranging from 74% to 100%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our systematic review found wearables were mostly used to measure physical activity, with the most common primary aim of measuring recovery. Most studies reported high adherence, although definitions of adherence were diverse. Our results highlight the need for more and larger studies on wearable technology in older cancer patients, the use of standardized reporting frameworks, and increased participation in research in low- and middle-income countries.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54686,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oncologist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oncologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oncolo/oyae319\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oncologist","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oncolo/oyae319","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管可穿戴技术在肿瘤学中的应用日益广泛,但其在老年患者(大多数癌症患者的代表)护理中的应用尚不明确:本系统综述旨在总结目前可穿戴设备在老年癌症患者研究中的应用情况:本系统性综述遵循 PRISMA 指南进行。于 2024 年 5 月 1 日在 PubMed、Embase、Emcare、Web of Science 和 Cochrane Library 中进行了系统检索。纳入的研究涉及可穿戴设备和年龄≥60 岁的癌症患者。报告的结果包括研究特点、可穿戴设备的结果、可行性和依从性。采用混合方法评估工具对纳入研究的质量进行评估:结果:共纳入 31 篇出版物,包括 1298 名老年患者。其中,12 项为试点/可行性研究,12 项为观察性研究,6 项为随机对照试验,1 项为横断面研究。大多数研究使用可穿戴数据来测量恢复情况(19 项研究,占 61%)。体力活动是研究最多的可穿戴结果(27 项研究,占 87%)。31项研究中有11项(35%)记录了可穿戴设备的依从性,依从性从74%到100%不等:我们的系统综述发现,可穿戴设备主要用于测量身体活动,最常见的主要目的是测量恢复情况。大多数研究都报告了较高的依从性,尽管对依从性的定义各不相同。我们的研究结果突出表明,有必要对老年癌症患者的可穿戴技术进行更多和更大规模的研究,使用标准化的报告框架,并提高中低收入国家对研究的参与度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The use of wearable technology in studies in older adults with cancer: a systematic review.

Background: Despite the increasing integration of wearable technology in oncology, its application in the care of older adults, representing most patients with cancer, is poorly defined.

Objective: This systematic review aimed to summarize the current use of wearables in studies in older adults with cancer.

Methods: This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Emcare, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library on May 1, 2024. Studies involving wearable devices and patients aged ≥60 years diagnosed with cancer were included. Outcomes reported were study characteristics, wearable outcomes, feasibility and adherence. The mixed method appraisal tool was used to assess the quality of included studies.

Results: A total of 31 publications were included, comprising 1298 older patients. Of these, 12 were pilot/feasibility studies, 12 were observational studies, 6 were randomized controlled trials, and 1 was a cross-sectional study. Most studies used wearable data to measure recovery (19 studies, 61%). Physical activity was the most studied wearable outcome (27 studies, 87%). Adherence to the wearable device was documented in 11 of the 31 studies (35%), with adherence ranging from 74% to 100%.

Conclusions: Our systematic review found wearables were mostly used to measure physical activity, with the most common primary aim of measuring recovery. Most studies reported high adherence, although definitions of adherence were diverse. Our results highlight the need for more and larger studies on wearable technology in older cancer patients, the use of standardized reporting frameworks, and increased participation in research in low- and middle-income countries.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Oncologist
Oncologist 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
3.40%
发文量
309
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Oncologist® is dedicated to translating the latest research developments into the best multidimensional care for cancer patients. Thus, The Oncologist is committed to helping physicians excel in this ever-expanding environment through the publication of timely reviews, original studies, and commentaries on important developments. We believe that the practice of oncology requires both an understanding of a range of disciplines encompassing basic science related to cancer, translational research, and clinical practice, but also the socioeconomic and psychosocial factors that determine access to care and quality of life and function following cancer treatment.
期刊最新文献
Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK) Inhibitors Show Activity in Colorectal Cancer With ALK Rearrangements: Case Series and Literature Review. Primary Resistance to RET Inhibition in a RET Fusion-Positive Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Carcinoma. Association of opioid use with survival in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: it is time for evidence-based behaviors. Prolonged complete response to adjuvant tepotinib in a patient with newly diagnosed disseminated glioblastoma harboring mesenchymal-epithelial transition fusion. Oncofusions - shaping cancer care.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1