Bernardine M Pinto1, Kevin Stein2, Shira Dunsiger1. 1. Centers for Behavioral and Preventive Medicine, The Miriam Hospital. 2. Behavioral Research Center, American Cancer Society.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although studies have shown that physical activity (PA) can reduce some treatment-related side effects of breast cancer, there is a need to offer PA programs outside of research settings to reach more cancer survivors. We partnered with the American Cancer Society's Reach to Recovery (RTR) program to train their volunteers (breast cancer survivors) to deliver a 12-week PA intervention to other breast cancer survivors. METHOD: We conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare the PA intervention delivered by RTR volunteers (PA plus RTR) with contact control (RTR control). Eighteen RTR volunteers/coaches (Mage = 54.9 years; Mtime since diagnosis = 7.0 years) delivered the contact control condition or the PA intervention. Seventy-six breast cancer survivors in New England (Mage = 55.6 years; Mtime since diagnosis = 1.1 years) were randomized to 1 of the 2 groups. At baseline, 12 weeks (postintervention), and at 24 weeks, participants wore an accelerometer for 7 days, were interviewed about their PA, and reported their motivational readiness for PA. RESULTS: Adjusted, mixed-effects longitudinal regression models showed significant group differences favoring the PA plus RTR group in minutes of moderate to vigorous PA at 12 weeks (Mdifference = 103 min/week, p < .001) and at 24 weeks (Mdifference = 34.7 min/week, p = .03). Results were corroborated with significant group differences in accelerometer data favoring the PA plus RTR group at both time points. CONCLUSION: Peer volunteers were able to significantly increase PA among cancer survivors relative to contact control. Partnerships with existing volunteer programs can help to widen the reach of behavioral interventions among cancer survivors. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Although studies have shown that physical activity (PA) can reduce some treatment-related side effects of breast cancer, there is a need to offer PA programs outside of research settings to reach more cancer survivors. We partnered with the American Cancer Society's Reach to Recovery (RTR) program to train their volunteers (breast cancer survivors) to deliver a 12-week PA intervention to other breast cancer survivors. METHOD: We conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare the PA intervention delivered by RTR volunteers (PA plus RTR) with contact control (RTR control). Eighteen RTR volunteers/coaches (Mage = 54.9 years; Mtime since diagnosis = 7.0 years) delivered the contact control condition or the PA intervention. Seventy-six breast cancer survivors in New England (Mage = 55.6 years; Mtime since diagnosis = 1.1 years) were randomized to 1 of the 2 groups. At baseline, 12 weeks (postintervention), and at 24 weeks, participants wore an accelerometer for 7 days, were interviewed about their PA, and reported their motivational readiness for PA. RESULTS: Adjusted, mixed-effects longitudinal regression models showed significant group differences favoring the PA plus RTR group in minutes of moderate to vigorous PA at 12 weeks (Mdifference = 103 min/week, p < .001) and at 24 weeks (Mdifference = 34.7 min/week, p = .03). Results were corroborated with significant group differences in accelerometer data favoring the PA plus RTR group at both time points. CONCLUSION: Peer volunteers were able to significantly increase PA among cancer survivors relative to contact control. Partnerships with existing volunteer programs can help to widen the reach of behavioral interventions among cancer survivors. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
Authors: Cheryl L Rock; Colleen Doyle; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Jeffrey Meyerhardt; Kerry S Courneya; Anna L Schwartz; Elisa V Bandera; Kathryn K Hamilton; Barbara Grant; Marji McCullough; Tim Byers; Ted Gansler Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2012-04-26 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Justin C Brown; Tania B Huedo-Medina; Linda S Pescatello; Shannon M Pescatello; Rebecca A Ferrer; Blair T Johnson Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2010-11-04 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Matthew P Buman; Peter R Giacobbi; Joseph M Dzierzewski; Adrienne Aiken Morgan; Christina S McCrae; Beverly L Roberts; Michael Marsiske Journal: J Phys Act Health Date: 2011-09
Authors: Bernardine M Pinto; Georita M Frierson; Carolyn Rabin; Joseph J Trunzo; Bess H Marcus Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-05-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bess H Marcus; Shira I Dunsiger; Dorothy W Pekmezi; Britta A Larsen; Beth C Bock; Kim M Gans; Becky Marquez; Kathleen M Morrow; Peter Tilkemeier Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Karen Basen-Engquist; Catherine M Alfano; Melissa Maitin-Shepard; Cynthia A Thomson; Kathryn H Schmitz; Bernardine M Pinto; Kevin Stein; David S Zucker; Karen L Syrjala; Elizabeth Fallon; Colleen Doyle; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Laura Q Rogers; Kerry S Courneya; Philip M Anton; Steven Verhulst; Sandra K Vicari; Randall S Robbs; Edward McAuley Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2016-09-06 Impact factor: 3.894