Fedricker Diane Barber1. 1. Department of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, Anderson Cancer Center, University of Texas in Houston.
Abstract
PURPOSE/ OBJECTIVES: To explore the relationships between adult cancer survivor and caregiver social support, self-efficacy for physical activity (SEPA), physical activity (PA) behavior, and quality of life (QOL); and to understand cancer survivors' and their caregivers' perceptions of social support in PA participation. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental. SETTING: Five community-based exercise sites located in East Texas. SAMPLE: 101 adult cancer survivors and caregivers. METHODS: Participants completed questionnaires, the 8-Foot Up-and-Go test, and open-ended questions. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and frequencies, Spearman's rho, Mann-Whitney U, and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Social support, SEPA, PA, and QOL. FINDINGS: Physical QOL was significantly higher in caregivers than cancer survivors. Spearman's rho identified a negative relationship between physical QOL and PA in cancer survivors; and a significant relationship between PA and PA participation in caregivers with social support from friend. Three themes emerged from the qualitative data regarding the perception of social support: companionship, motivation, and health promotion. CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers have higher QOL despite being the major social support provider to cancer survivors. Social support is essential to PA participation. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Interventions to increase PA in adult cancer survivors may consider encouraging their caregivers to actively participate. KNOWLEDGE TRANSLATION: Caregivers play an important role in the PA of cancer survivors. Perceived social support in the form of companionship and motivation may increase PA in cancer survivors and caregivers. Therefore, nurses may consider educating cancer survivors and caregivers on the importance of adopting and maintaining PA throughout the cancer care continuum.
PURPOSE/ OBJECTIVES: To explore the relationships between adult cancer survivor and caregiver social support, self-efficacy for physical activity (SEPA), physical activity (PA) behavior, and quality of life (QOL); and to understand cancer survivors' and their caregivers' perceptions of social support in PA participation. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental. SETTING: Five community-based exercise sites located in East Texas. SAMPLE: 101 adult cancer survivors and caregivers. METHODS:Participants completed questionnaires, the 8-Foot Up-and-Go test, and open-ended questions. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and frequencies, Spearman's rho, Mann-Whitney U, and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Social support, SEPA, PA, and QOL. FINDINGS: Physical QOL was significantly higher in caregivers than cancer survivors. Spearman's rho identified a negative relationship between physical QOL and PA in cancer survivors; and a significant relationship between PA and PA participation in caregivers with social support from friend. Three themes emerged from the qualitative data regarding the perception of social support: companionship, motivation, and health promotion. CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers have higher QOL despite being the major social support provider to cancer survivors. Social support is essential to PA participation. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Interventions to increase PA in adult cancer survivors may consider encouraging their caregivers to actively participate. KNOWLEDGE TRANSLATION: Caregivers play an important role in the PA of cancer survivors. Perceived social support in the form of companionship and motivation may increase PA in cancer survivors and caregivers. Therefore, nurses may consider educating cancer survivors and caregivers on the importance of adopting and maintaining PA throughout the cancer care continuum.
Authors: Claire J Han; Biljana Gigic; Martin Schneider; Yakup Kulu; Anita R Peoples; Jennifer Ose; Torsten Kölsch; Paul B Jacobsen; Graham A Colditz; Jane C Figueiredo; William M Grady; Christopher I Li; David Shibata; Erin M Siegel; Adetunji T Toriola; Alexis B Ulrich; Karen L Syrjala; Cornelia M Ulrich Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2020-03-12 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Melissa J J Voorn; Bart C Bongers; Vivian E M van Kampen-van den Boogaart; Elisabeth J M Driessen; Maryska L G Janssen-Heijnen Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-05-12 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Megan C Thomas Hebdon; Lorinda A Coombs; Pamela Reed; Tracy E Crane; Terry A Badger Journal: Eur J Oncol Nurs Date: 2021-03-10 Impact factor: 2.588
Authors: Karen Milton; Karen Poole; Ainslea Cross; Sophie Gasson; Kajal Gokal; Karen Lyons; Richard Pulsford; Andy Jones Journal: Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Date: 2022-03-13 Impact factor: 2.328