Evaluation of electronic patient–reported outcome assessment in inpatient cancer care: a feasibility study

Research output: Contribution to journalResearch articleContributedpeer-review


  • Hanna Salm - , University of Greifswald, Helios Hospital Group (Author)
  • Leopold Hentschel - , University Cancer Centre (Author)
  • Martin Eichler - , University Cancer Centre (Author)
  • Daniel Pink - , University of Greifswald, Helios Hospital Group (Author)
  • Stephan Fuhrmann - , Helios Hospital Emil von Behring (Author)
  • Michael Kramer - , AvenCell Europe GmbH (Author)
  • Peter Reichardt - , HELIOS Klinikum Berlin-Buch (Author)
  • Markus K. Schuler - , Dresden University of Technology (Author)


Purpose: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are increasingly important in evaluating medical care. The increased integration of technology within the healthcare systems allows for collection of PROs electronically. The objectives of this study were to Ashley et al. J Med Internet Res (2013) implement an electronic assessment of PROs in inpatient cancer care and test its feasibility for patients and Dawson et al. BMJ (2010) determine the equivalence of the paper and electronic assessment. Methods: We analyzed two arms from a study that was originally designed to be an interventional, three-arm, and multicenter inpatient trial. A self-administered questionnaire based on validated PRO-measures was applied and completed at admission, 1 week after, and at discharge. For this analysis — focusing on feasibility of the electronic assessment — the following groups will be considered: Group A (intervention arm) received a tablet version, while group B (control arm) completed the questionnaire on paper. A feasibility questionnaire, that was adapted from Ashley et al. J Med Internet Res (2013), was administered to group A. Results: We analyzed 103 patients that were recruited in oncology wards. ePRO was feasible to most patients, with 84% preferring the electronic over paper-based assessment. The feasibility questionnaire contained questions that were answered on a scale ranging from “1” (illustrating non achievement) to “5” (illustrating achieving goal). The majority (mean 4.24, SD.99) reported no difficulties handling the electronic tool and found it relatively easy finding time for filling out the questionnaire (mean 4.15, SD 1.05). There were no significant differences between the paper and the electronic assessment regarding the PROs. Conclusion: Results indicate that electronic PRO assessment in inpatient cancer care is feasible.


Original languageEnglish
Article number575
Number of pages10
JournalSupportive care in cancer
Issue number10
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2023

External IDs

PubMed 37707633
ORCID /0000-0001-9654-2207/work/146646074


Sustainable Development Goals


  • Electronic assessment, Feasibility, Inpatient cancer care, Patient-reported outcomes, Inpatients, Neoplasms/therapy, Humans, Electronics, Hospitalization, Feasibility Studies, Patient Reported Outcome Measures