COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF EHEALTH INTERVENTIONS ON QUALITY OF LIFE AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING IN PATIENTS WITH LUNG CANCER: A NETWORK META-ANALYSIS
Author(s)
zhenjie yu, PhD1, Wai-kit Ming, MBA, MPH, PhD, MD2, Zhiguang HUANG, PhD3, Yan HE, PhD4, Yuyang Yi, PhD5, Xinchang LIU, PhD5, Xinyao YI, PhD5.
1Student, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China, 2City University of Hong Kong, City University of Hong Kong, China, 3City University of Hong Kong, Hong kong, China, 4City University of Hong Kong, Kowlong, China, 5City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
1Student, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China, 2City University of Hong Kong, City University of Hong Kong, China, 3City University of Hong Kong, Hong kong, China, 4City University of Hong Kong, Kowlong, China, 5City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
OBJECTIVES: To systematically evaluate the effects of various eHealth interventions on quality of life, anxiety and depression in lung cancer patients, and compare different intervention modalities through network meta-analysis (NMA).
METHODS: Five databases were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to 1 January 2026. Two researchers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Pairwise meta-analysis and NMA were performed using RevMan 5.4 and R Studio, PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42024618474.
RESULTS: Eight RCTs reported quality of life outcomes. Pooled analysis showed significant overall benefits (SMD = 0.52, 95% CI [0.13, 0.91], P < 0.001). NMA found mobile phone combined reporting, single mobile phone, APP and instant messaging interventions could not significantly improve quality of life versus usual care. Four RCTs each reported anxiety and depression outcomes; pooled analyses showed overall significant relief of anxiety (SMD = -0.42, 95% CI [-0.57, -0.27], P < 0.001) and depression (SMD = -0.46, 95% CI [-0.68, -0.24], P < 0.001), with NMA indicating only APP interventions produced statistically significant improvements for both indicators.
CONCLUSIONS: eHealth interventions exert significant benefits on lung cancer patients' quality of life, anxiety and depression in pairwise meta-analysis. While APP-based interventions effectively alleviate both anxiety and depression, current evidence cannot confirm any eHealth modality superior for quality of life improvement. Due to limited included studies, more high-quality trials are required. Future research should develop optimized digital schemes to improve lung cancer survivors' physical and psychological outcomes.
METHODS: Five databases were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to 1 January 2026. Two researchers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Pairwise meta-analysis and NMA were performed using RevMan 5.4 and R Studio, PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42024618474.
RESULTS: Eight RCTs reported quality of life outcomes. Pooled analysis showed significant overall benefits (SMD = 0.52, 95% CI [0.13, 0.91], P < 0.001). NMA found mobile phone combined reporting, single mobile phone, APP and instant messaging interventions could not significantly improve quality of life versus usual care. Four RCTs each reported anxiety and depression outcomes; pooled analyses showed overall significant relief of anxiety (SMD = -0.42, 95% CI [-0.57, -0.27], P < 0.001) and depression (SMD = -0.46, 95% CI [-0.68, -0.24], P < 0.001), with NMA indicating only APP interventions produced statistically significant improvements for both indicators.
CONCLUSIONS: eHealth interventions exert significant benefits on lung cancer patients' quality of life, anxiety and depression in pairwise meta-analysis. While APP-based interventions effectively alleviate both anxiety and depression, current evidence cannot confirm any eHealth modality superior for quality of life improvement. Due to limited included studies, more high-quality trials are required. Future research should develop optimized digital schemes to improve lung cancer survivors' physical and psychological outcomes.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
CO77
Topic
Clinical Outcomes, Methodological & Statistical Research, Patient-Centered Research
Topic Subcategory
Comparative Effectiveness or Efficacy
Disease
Oncology, Personalized & Precision Medicine, Respiratory-Related Disorders (Allergy, Asthma, Smoking, Other Respiratory)