Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with prostate cancer undergoing radiation therapy (RT) need comfortably full bladders to reduce toxicities during treatment. Poor compliance is common with standard of care written or verbal instructions, leading to wasted patient value (PV) and clinic resources via poor throughput efficiency (TE). OBJECTIVE: Herein, we assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a smartphone-based behavioral intervention (SBI) to improve bladder-filling compliance and methods for quantifying PV and TE. METHODS: In total, 36 patients with prostate cancer were enrolled in a single-institution, closed-access, nonrandomized feasibility trial. The SBI consists of a fully automated smart water bottle and smartphone app. Both pieces alert the patient to empty his bladder and drink a personalized volume goal, based on simulation bladder volume, 1.25 hours before his scheduled RT. Patients were trained to adjust their volume goal and notification times to achieve comfortably full bladders. The primary end point was met if qualitative (QLC) and quantitative compliance (QNC) were >80%. For QLC, patients were asked if they prepared their bladders before daily RT. QNC was met if bladder volumes on daily cone-beam tomography were >75% of the simulation's volume. The Service User Technology Acceptability Questionnaire (SUTAQ) was given in person pre- and post-SBI. Additional acceptability and engagement end points were met if >3 out of 5 across 4 domains on the SUTAQ and >80% (15/18) of patients used the device >50% of the time, respectively. Finally, the impact of SBI on PV and TE was measured by time spent in a clinic and on the linear accelerator (linac), respectively, and contrasted with matched controls. RESULTS: QLC was 100% in 375 out of 398 (94.2%) total treatments, while QNC was 88.9% in 341 out of 398 (85.7%) total treatments. Of a total score of 5, patients scored 4.33 on privacy concerns, 4 on belief in benefits, 4.56 on satisfaction, and 4.24 on usability via SUTAQ. Further, 83% (15/18) of patients used the SBI on >50% of treatments. Patients in the intervention arm spent less time in a clinic (53.24, SEM 1.71 minutes) compared to the control (75.01, SEM 2.26 minutes) group (P<.001). Similarly, the intervention arm spent less time on the linac (10.67, SEM 0.40 minutes) compared to the control (14.19, SEM 0.32 minutes) group (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: This digital intervention trial showed high rates of bladder-filling compliance and engagement. High patient value and TE were feasibly quantified by shortened clinic times and linac usage, respectively. Future studies are needed to evaluate clinical outcomes, patient experience, and cost-benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04946214; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04946214.