Purpose: A “Smart Cancer Care” platform that integrates patient-reported outcomes (PROs) with management has been established in Korea. This study focused on improving health behaviors and connecting patients to welfare services by introducing and assessing the feasibility of “Smart Cancer Care 2.0,” an enhanced version designed for monitoring complications post-cancer treatment. Materials and Methods: Smart Cancer Care 2.0 was developed by conducting a literature review and consulting with expert panels to identify symptoms or variables requiring monitoring and management guidelines based on the treatment type. Qualitative and quantitative surveys were conducted to assess the feasibility of the app and web system based on the experiences of patients with cancer and healthcare workers. Results: A total of 81 symptoms or variables (chemotherapy-, surgery-, radiotherapy-, rehabilitation-, and health management-related) were selected for management in Smart Cancer Care 2.0. PROs for these symptoms were basically categorized into three severity grades: preventive management, self-treatment, and consultation with a healthcare worker or visit to a healthcare institution. The overall mean scores in the feasibility evaluation by patients and healthcare workers were 3.83 and 3.90 points, respectively, indicating high usefulness. Conclusion Smart Cancer Care 2.0 leverages the existing information and communication technologies–based platform, Smart Cancer Care, and further includes health behaviors and welfare services. Smart Cancer Care 2.0 may play a crucial role in establishing a comprehensive post-discharge management system for patients with cancer as it provides suitable interventions based on patients’ responses and allows the regularly collected PROs to be easily viewed for streamlined care.

Purpose: A “Smart Cancer Care” platform that integrates patient-reported outcomes (PROs) with management has been established in Korea. This study focused on improving health behaviors and connecting patients to welfare services by introducing and assessing the feasibility of “Smart Cancer Care 2.0,” an enhanced version designed for monitoring complications post-cancer treatment. Materials and Methods: Smart Cancer Care 2.0 was developed by conducting a literature review and consulting with expert panels to identify symptoms or variables requiring monitoring and management guidelines based on the treatment type. Qualitative and quantitative surveys were conducted to assess the feasibility of the app and web system based on the experiences of patients with cancer and healthcare workers. Results: A total of 81 symptoms or variables (chemotherapy-, surgery-, radiotherapy-, rehabilitation-, and health management-related) were selected for management in Smart Cancer Care 2.0. PROs for these symptoms were basically categorized into three severity grades: preventive management, self-treatment, and consultation with a healthcare worker or visit to a healthcare institution. The overall mean scores in the feasibility evaluation by patients and healthcare workers were 3.83 and 3.90 points, respectively, indicating high usefulness. Conclusion Smart Cancer Care 2.0 leverages the existing information and communication technologies–based platform, Smart Cancer Care, and further includes health behaviors and welfare services. Smart Cancer Care 2.0 may play a crucial role in establishing a comprehensive post-discharge management system for patients with cancer as it provides suitable interventions based on patients’ responses and allows the regularly collected PROs to be easily viewed for streamlined care.

Purpose: A “Smart Cancer Care” platform that integrates patient-reported outcomes (PROs) with management has been established in Korea. This study focused on improving health behaviors and connecting patients to welfare services by introducing and assessing the feasibility of “Smart Cancer Care 2.0,” an enhanced version designed for monitoring complications post-cancer treatment. Materials and Methods: Smart Cancer Care 2.0 was developed by conducting a literature review and consulting with expert panels to identify symptoms or variables requiring monitoring and management guidelines based on the treatment type. Qualitative and quantitative surveys were conducted to assess the feasibility of the app and web system based on the experiences of patients with cancer and healthcare workers. Results: A total of 81 symptoms or variables (chemotherapy-, surgery-, radiotherapy-, rehabilitation-, and health management-related) were selected for management in Smart Cancer Care 2.0. PROs for these symptoms were basically categorized into three severity grades: preventive management, self-treatment, and consultation with a healthcare worker or visit to a healthcare institution. The overall mean scores in the feasibility evaluation by patients and healthcare workers were 3.83 and 3.90 points, respectively, indicating high usefulness. Conclusion Smart Cancer Care 2.0 leverages the existing information and communication technologies–based platform, Smart Cancer Care, and further includes health behaviors and welfare services. Smart Cancer Care 2.0 may play a crucial role in establishing a comprehensive post-discharge management system for patients with cancer as it provides suitable interventions based on patients’ responses and allows the regularly collected PROs to be easily viewed for streamlined care.

Purpose: A “Smart Cancer Care” platform that integrates patient-reported outcomes (PROs) with management has been established in Korea. This study focused on improving health behaviors and connecting patients to welfare services by introducing and assessing the feasibility of “Smart Cancer Care 2.0,” an enhanced version designed for monitoring complications post-cancer treatment. Materials and Methods: Smart Cancer Care 2.0 was developed by conducting a literature review and consulting with expert panels to identify symptoms or variables requiring monitoring and management guidelines based on the treatment type. Qualitative and quantitative surveys were conducted to assess the feasibility of the app and web system based on the experiences of patients with cancer and healthcare workers. Results: A total of 81 symptoms or variables (chemotherapy-, surgery-, radiotherapy-, rehabilitation-, and health management-related) were selected for management in Smart Cancer Care 2.0. PROs for these symptoms were basically categorized into three severity grades: preventive management, self-treatment, and consultation with a healthcare worker or visit to a healthcare institution. The overall mean scores in the feasibility evaluation by patients and healthcare workers were 3.83 and 3.90 points, respectively, indicating high usefulness. Conclusion Smart Cancer Care 2.0 leverages the existing information and communication technologies–based platform, Smart Cancer Care, and further includes health behaviors and welfare services. Smart Cancer Care 2.0 may play a crucial role in establishing a comprehensive post-discharge management system for patients with cancer as it provides suitable interventions based on patients’ responses and allows the regularly collected PROs to be easily viewed for streamlined care.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between the anatomical location of thrombi in the lower extremities and the development of pulmonary embolism (PE). Materials and Methods: We collected and analyzed the data of patients diagnosed with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower extremities between 2006 and 2015, and included those whose computed tomography (CT) data were available for PE identification. We evaluated the relationship between the laterality and the proximal/distal location of the thrombi in lower extremites and the location of PE. Results: CT images were available for 388/452 patients with DVT. After excluding 32 cases with bilateral involvement, 356 cases were included for analysis in this study. The ratio of DVT in the left:right leg was 232:124. PEs developed in 121 (52.2%) patients with left-sided DVT and in 78 (62.9%) with right-sided DVT (P=0.052). PEs in the main pulmonary arteries developed in 36 (15.5%) patients with left leg DVT and in 30 (24.2%) with right leg DVT (P=0.045). The most frequent site of thrombosis associated with the development of PE was the left iliac vein (59/199, 29.6%). According to the anatomical segment of the leg affected by DVT, patients with DVT in the right femoral vein (50/71, 70.4%; P=0.016) had the highest rate of occurrence of PE. Conclusion PE develops more frequently in patients with right-sided DVT than in those with left-sided DVT. Therefore, careful observation for the possible development of PE is recommended in cases with right-sided DVT of the lower extremity.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between the anatomical location of thrombi in the lower extremities and the development of pulmonary embolism (PE). Materials and Methods: We collected and analyzed the data of patients diagnosed with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower extremities between 2006 and 2015, and included those whose computed tomography (CT) data were available for PE identification. We evaluated the relationship between the laterality and the proximal/distal location of the thrombi in lower extremites and the location of PE. Results: CT images were available for 388/452 patients with DVT. After excluding 32 cases with bilateral involvement, 356 cases were included for analysis in this study. The ratio of DVT in the left:right leg was 232:124. PEs developed in 121 (52.2%) patients with left-sided DVT and in 78 (62.9%) with right-sided DVT (P=0.052). PEs in the main pulmonary arteries developed in 36 (15.5%) patients with left leg DVT and in 30 (24.2%) with right leg DVT (P=0.045). The most frequent site of thrombosis associated with the development of PE was the left iliac vein (59/199, 29.6%). According to the anatomical segment of the leg affected by DVT, patients with DVT in the right femoral vein (50/71, 70.4%; P=0.016) had the highest rate of occurrence of PE. Conclusion PE develops more frequently in patients with right-sided DVT than in those with left-sided DVT. Therefore, careful observation for the possible development of PE is recommended in cases with right-sided DVT of the lower extremity.