Improving cancer education and safety in rural communities through a digital literacy platform.

Abstract

e23302 Background: Cancer care is increasingly complex, requiring patients to understand diagnoses, treatment options, side effects, and adherence requirements during periods of emotional distress. Limited health literacy, time constraints during clinical encounters, and variability in educational materials contribute to gaps in patient understanding, particularly in rural populations. We developed a clinician-led digital education platform delivering standardized, plain-language cancer education videos integrated into real-world oncology practice. Methods: We evaluated clinician-developed video education in a rural oncology practice. Videos were delivered after the initial physician encounter and before formal chemotherapy education sessions conducted by nurses. Content followed NIH plain-language guidelines and addressed three core questions: what the treatment is, why it is necessary, and how it is administered and managed. Videos were available via Oncology101.org, viewed in the clinic and at home. Patients were grouped by pre-education exposure: video (n = 10), pamphlet (n = 22), or no materials (n = 24). Preparedness and anxiety were assessed using a 10-point Likert scale, and education session duration was recorded. Group differences were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test. Results: Fifty-six patients were analyzed: 10 (18%) reviewed video education, 22 (39%) reviewed pamphlets, and 24 (43%) received no prior materials. Preparedness differed significantly across groups (median [IQR]: 10 [8–10] vs 9 [5–10] vs 9 [5–10]; p = 0.046). Mean ± SD preparedness scores were 8.44 ± 2.92 (video), 7.64 ± 2.77 (pamphlet), and 7.21 ± 3.27 (none). Preparedness was lower by 10.5% in the pamphlet group and 16.7% in the no-resource group compared with the video group. Anxiety scores were similar across groups (5.44 ± 3.09 vs 3.59 ± 3.28 vs 4.17 ± 3.36; p > 0.05), and education session duration did not differ significantly (56.1 ± 24.7 vs 54.9 ± 12.5 vs 53.5 ± 19.5 minutes; p > 0.05). Nurses reported improved patient preparedness, satisfaction, and consistency of education among patients who accessed video content. Conclusions: Clinician-led digital education is feasible and scalable in a rural oncology setting and is associated with improved patient preparedness without increased anxiety. Oncology101.org provides standardized, accessible, physician-designed education that complements clinical encounters. These findings support broader implementation and prospective evaluation of digital clinician-led education as an integral component of contemporary oncology care. The table summarizes the duration of formal education sessions, perceived preparedness, and perceived anxiety across the three groups. Outcome Video Pamphlet None p-value Preparedness 8.44 ± 2.92 7.64 ± 2.77 7.21 ± 3.27 0.046 Anxiety 5.44 ± 3.09 3.59 ± 3.28 4.17 ± 3.36 NS Time (min) 56.1 ± 24.7 54.9 ± 12.5 53.5 ± 19.5 NS