Oncology patients undergoing cancer treatment experience an average of fifteen unrelieved symptoms that are highly variable in both their severity and distress. Recent advances in Network Analysis (NA) provide a novel approach to gain insights into the complex nature of co-occurring symptoms and symptom clusters and identify core symptoms. We present findings from the first study that used NA to examine the relationships among 38 common symptoms in a large sample of oncology patients undergoing chemotherapy. Using two different models of Pairwise Markov Random Fields (PMRF), we examined the nature and structure of interactions for three different dimensions of patients’ symptom experience (i.e., occurrence, severity, distress). Findings from this study provide the first direct evidence that the connections between and among symptoms differ depending on the symptom dimension used to create the network. Based on an evaluation of the centrality indices, nausea appears to be a structurally important node in all three networks. Our findings can be used to guide the development of symptom management interventions based on the identification of core symptoms and symptom clusters within a network.

While co-design methods are becoming more popular in healthcare; there is a gap within the peer-reviewed literature on how to do co-design in practice. This paper addresses this gap by delineating the approach taken in the co-design of a collective leadership intervention to improve healthcare team performance and patient safety culture. Over the course of six workshops healthcare staff, patient representatives and advocates, and health systems researchers collaboratively co-designed the intervention. The inputs to the process, exercises and activities that took place during the workshops and the outputs of the workshops are described. The co-design method, while challenging at times, had many benefits including grounding the intervention in the real-world experiences of healthcare teams. Implications of the method for health systems research are discussed.

Introduction While some evidence exists that real-time remote symptom monitoring devices can decrease morbidity and prevent unplanned admissions in oncology patients, overall, these studies have significant methodological weaknesses. The electronic Symptom Management using the Advanced Symptom Management System (ASyMS) Remote Technology (eSMART) study is designed to specifically address these weaknesses with an appropriately powered, repeated-measures, parallel-group stratified randomised controlled trial of oncology patients. Methods and analysis A total of 1108 patients scheduled to commence first-line chemotherapy (CTX) for breast, colorectal or haematological cancer will be recruited from multiple sites across five European countries. Patients will be randomised (1:1) to the ASyMS intervention (intervention group) or to standard care currently available at each site (control group). Patients in the control and intervention groups will complete a demographic and clinical questionnaire, as well as a set of valid and reliable electronic patient-reported outcome measures at enrolment, after each of their CTX cycles (up to a maximum of six cycles) and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after completion of their sixth cycle of CTX. Outcomes that will be assessed include symptom burden (primary outcome), quality of life, supportive care needs, anxiety, self-care self-efficacy, work limitations and cost effectiveness and, from a health professional perspective, changes in clinical practice (secondary outcomes). Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval will be obtained prior to the implementation of all major study amendments. Applications will be submitted to all of the ethics committees that granted initial approval. eSMART received approval from the relevant ethics committees at all of the clinical sites across the five participating countries. In collaboration with the European Cancer Patient Coalition (ECPC), the trial results will be disseminated through publications in scientific journals, presentations at international conferences, and postings on the eSMART website and other relevant clinician and consumer websites; establishment of an eSMART website (www.esmartproject.eu) with publicly accessible general information; creation of an eSMART Twitter Handle, and production of a toolkit for implementing/utilising the ASyMS technology in a variety of clinical practices and other transferable health care contexts. Trial registration number NCT02356081.

The purpose of the eSMART (Electronic Symptom Management using the Advanced Symptom Management System (ASyMS) Remote Technology) study is to evaluate the use of mobile phone technology to manage chemotherapy-related toxicities (CRTs) in people with breast cancer (BC), colorectal cancer (CRC), Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL)) across multiple European sites. One key objective was to review the published and grey literature on assessment and management of CRTs among patients receiving primary chemotherapy for BC, CRC, HL, and NHL to ensure that ASyMS remained evidence-based and reflected current and local practice. Three electronic databases were searched for English papers, with abstracts available from 01/01/2004-05/04/2014. For the grey literature, relevant clinical practice guidelines (CPGs)/evidence-based resources (EBRs) from the main international cancer organisations were reviewed as were symptom management (SM) protocols from the sites. After full-text screening, 27 publications were included. The majority (n = 14) addressed fatigue and focused on BC patients. Relevant CPGs/EBRs were found for fatigue (n = 4), nausea/vomiting (n = 5), mucositis (n = 4), peripheral neuropathy (n = 3), diarrhoea (n = 2), constipation (n = 2), febrile neutropenia/infection (n = 7), palmar plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE) (n = 1), and pain (n = 4). SM protocols were provided by >40% of the clinical sites. A need exists for empirical research on SM for PPE, diarrhoea, and constipation. Research is needed on the efficacy of self-care strategies in patients with BC, CRC, HL, and NHL. In general, consistency exists across CPGs/EBRs and local guidelines on the assessment and management of common CRTs.