Skip to content

Telemedicine Improves Pain-related Disabilities in Following up Cancer Pain Outpatient

Telemedicine Improves Pain-related Disabilities in Following up Cancer Pain Outpatient: A Prospective Non-randomized Study.

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05628246
Enrollment
193
Registered
2022-11-28
Start date
2023-01-19
Completion date
2026-03-31
Last updated
2026-05-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Pain, Chronic, Cancer Pain

Brief summary

Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide, with approximately 18.1 million new cases and 9.6 million deaths reported in 2018. Cancer-related pain is experienced by 50-70% of patients, with a higher prevalence at advanced disease stages (66.4%). Since the development of WHO's cancer pain guidelines, several studies have reported good relief of symptoms and suffering for a majority of patients. Recent reports suggest that up to 50% of patients still report insufficient pain control. Patients with cancer often present with multiple symptoms and functional decline. Evidence supports multidisciplinary approaches to address symptoms and suffering, including early palliative care referral From review literatures we found that the telemedicine group had significantly higher quality of life than the usual care group. In addition, the telemedicine group had lower anxiety and depression scores than the usual care group. Therefore, we will conduct the non-randomized controlled study of using telemedicine comparing to conventional in-person at OPD in hospitalized cancer pain patients. The purpose of this study is to assess the pain interference by using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and to compare between the in-person group and the telemedicine group. To assess the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine for reducing symptoms associated with cancer and its treatment.

Detailed description

The pain interference will be assessed and compared using Brief Pain Inventory from 0-70 between In-person group and telemedicine group at 1 month.

Interventions

OTHERTelemedicine

Telemedicine

In-person

Sponsors

Mahidol University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Age older than 18 years old * Cancer patients who new visit as out patient at pain clinic, Siriraj hospital

Exclusion criteria

* Cannot read and write * Confusion * Unable to use the 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) to rate pain intensity. * Unstable clinical presentation

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pain interferenceat 1 monthThe pain interference will be assessed and compared using Brief Pain Inventory from 0-70 between In-person group and telemedicine group.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Quality of life (QoL)at 1 monthThe quality of life will be assessed and compared using EuroQoL 5D5L between In-person group and telemedicine group.
Pain intensityat 1 month, 2 months and 3 monthsThe pain intensity from BPI (Brief Pain Inventory), including worst, least, average, and current pain reduction, will be assessed and compared using the numerical rating (NRS) from 0-10; 0 designating "no pain" and 10 designating " worst possible pain" scale between the in-person group and the telemedicine group.
Economic studyAt Baseline, 1 month, 2 month and 3 monthWe conducted an economic study evaluation from the patient and caregiver perspective. Costs analyzed included direct medical costs, direct non-medical costs (such as transportation and food), and indirect costs (total productivity loss). We calculated the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) to determine the economic value of telemedicine relative to in-person care. The ICER was defined as the incremental difference in total direct costs divided by the incremental difference in clinical effectiveness across multiple outcomes, including EQ-5D-5L utility, EQ-VAS, PPS, total BPI reduction, and avoided increases in MEDD. The results were further visualized on a cost-effectiveness plane.

Countries

Thailand

Contacts

STUDY_DIRECTORSuratsawadee Wangnamthip, M.D.

Mahidol University

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: May 14, 2026