Longitudinal evaluation of Supportive care Prioritization, Assessment and Recommendations for Kids (SPARK), a symptom screening and management application

• Published in: BMC cancer Vol. 19; no. 1; p. 458
• Main Authors: Vettese, Emily, Cook, Sadie, Soman, Dilip, Kuczynski, Susan, Spiegler, Brenda, Davis, Hailey, Duong, Nathan, Schechter, Tal, Dupuis, L Lee, Sung, Lillian
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 16.05.2019; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Cancer; Cancer research; Cancer screening; Cancer therapies; Care and treatment; Chemotherapy; Childhood cancer; Children; Clinical medicine; Clinical trials; Cognitive ability; Diagnosis; Feasibility studies; Feedback; Health aspects; Health screening; Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; Hematopoietic stem cells; Internet software; Medical personnel; Oncology; Organ transplant recipients; Patient reported outcomes; Pediatric cancer; Pediatrics; Professionals; Self report; Stem cell transplantation; Stem cells; Supportive care; Symptom management; Symptom screening; Transplants & implants; Websites; Oncology; Supportive care; Pediatric cancer; Symptom screening; Patient reported outcomes; Self-report
• ISSN: 1471-2407; 1471-2407
• DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5662-9

Supportive care Prioritization, Assessment and Recommendations for Kids (SPARK) is a web application focused on improving symptom control. It enables pediatric cancer and hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients to self-report and track symptoms, and allows healthcare professionals to access guidelines for symptom management. Objective was to determine the feasibility of longitudinal collection of symptom data. In this longitudinal, single-armed feasibility study, respondents were children 8-18 years of age with cancer or pediatric HSCT recipients. Participants completed symptom reporting daily for 5 days. Cognitive interviews were conducted on day 5. Quantitative evaluation included SPARK ease of use and understandability of SPARK reports. Qualitative feedback on facilitators and barriers to daily symptom screening was solicited. Feasibility was defined as ≥75% of participants completing symptom screening on at least 60% of on-study days during the five-day study. Among the 30 children enrolled, the median number of days SSPedi was completed at least once was 5 (range 3 to 5). Overall, 28/29 (96.6%) thought completing symptom screening using SPARK was easy or very easy. All participants understood SPARK symptom reports. Severe symptoms was the most common barrier to daily reporting while an alarm reminder system was the most commonly identified facilitator. Daily completion of symptom screening using SPARK over 5 days was feasible in children aged 8 to 18 years with cancer and pediatric HSCT recipients. SPARK is now appropriate for use in randomized trials to evaluate the effect of symptom screening and symptom feedback.