Ana D Goode1, Sheleigh P Lawler2, Charlotte L Brakenridge2, Marina M Reeves2, Elizabeth G Eakin2. 1. School of Public Health, Cancer Prevention Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Level 4 Public Health Building, Herston Rd, Herston, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. a.goode@sph.uq.edu.au. 2. School of Public Health, Cancer Prevention Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Level 4 Public Health Building, Herston Rd, Herston, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Broad-reach (non-face-to-face) modalities offer an accessible and cost-effective means to provide behavior change programs in diverse and growing cancer survivor populations. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy of physical activity, dietary, and/or weight control interventions for cancer survivors in which telephone, short-message service, print, and/or Web is the primary method of delivery. METHODS: A structured search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and CENTRAL (May 2013) was conducted. Included studies focused and reported on physical activity (PA) and dietary change and/or weight control in adult cancer survivors, delivered at least 50% of intervention contacts by broad-reach modality and included a control group. Study design, intervention features, and behavioral/weight outcomes were extracted, tabulated, and summarized. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were included; 22 telephone, three Web, and two print. Sixteen studies targeted PA, two diet, and nine targeted multiple behaviors. Most studies (18/27) targeted a single survivor group, namely breast cancer (n = 12). Nineteen of 27 studies found evidence for initiation of behavior change, with only eight reporting on maintenance and one on cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides support for broad-reach modalities, particularly the telephone, in the delivery of lifestyle interventions to cancer survivors. Future research should evaluate (1) newer technologies (i.e., SMS and mobile phone applications), (2) interventions for diverse cancer survivors and those targeting multiple behaviors, (3) long-term outcomes, and 4) cost-effectiveness. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Broad-reach lifestyle interventions are effective, with further research needed to evaluate their generalizability and integration into cancer care.
PURPOSE: Broad-reach (non-face-to-face) modalities offer an accessible and cost-effective means to provide behavior change programs in diverse and growing cancer survivor populations. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy of physical activity, dietary, and/or weight control interventions for cancer survivors in which telephone, short-message service, print, and/or Web is the primary method of delivery. METHODS: A structured search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and CENTRAL (May 2013) was conducted. Included studies focused and reported on physical activity (PA) and dietary change and/or weight control in adult cancer survivors, delivered at least 50% of intervention contacts by broad-reach modality and included a control group. Study design, intervention features, and behavioral/weight outcomes were extracted, tabulated, and summarized. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were included; 22 telephone, three Web, and two print. Sixteen studies targeted PA, two diet, and nine targeted multiple behaviors. Most studies (18/27) targeted a single survivor group, namely breast cancer (n = 12). Nineteen of 27 studies found evidence for initiation of behavior change, with only eight reporting on maintenance and one on cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides support for broad-reach modalities, particularly the telephone, in the delivery of lifestyle interventions to cancer survivors. Future research should evaluate (1) newer technologies (i.e., SMS and mobile phone applications), (2) interventions for diverse cancer survivors and those targeting multiple behaviors, (3) long-term outcomes, and 4) cost-effectiveness. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Broad-reach lifestyle interventions are effective, with further research needed to evaluate their generalizability and integration into cancer care.
Entities:
Keywords:
Broad-reach; Cancer survivors; Diet; Physical activity; Telephone; Weight loss
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: Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Elizabeth C Clipp; Miriam C Morey; Carl F Pieper; Richard Sloane; Denise Clutter Snyder; Harvey J Cohen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bernardine M Pinto; Carolyn Rabin; George D Papandonatos; Georita M Frierson; Joseph J Trunzo; Bess H Marcus Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2008-04-15 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: K S Courneya; C M Friedenreich; H A Quinney; A L A Fields; L W Jones; A S Fairey Journal: Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 2.520
Authors: Daniel Y T Fong; Judy W C Ho; Bryant P H Hui; Antoinette M Lee; Duncan J Macfarlane; Sharron S K Leung; Ester Cerin; Wynnie Y Y Chan; Ivy P F Leung; Sharon H S Lam; Aliki J Taylor; Kar-keung Cheng Journal: BMJ Date: 2012-01-30
Authors: Liam Bourke; Kate E Homer; Mohamed A Thaha; Liz Steed; Derek J Rosario; Karen A Robb; John M Saxton; Stephanie J C Taylor Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2013-09-24
Authors: Andrea S Mendoza-Vasconez; Elva M Arredondo; Britta Larsen; Noe Crespo; Samantha Hurst; Bess H Marcus Journal: Int J Behav Med Date: 2021-01-08
Authors: Ashley R Grant; Bogda Koczwara; Julia N Morris; Elizabeth Eakin; Camille E Short; Lisa Beatty Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Anna E Arthur; Ashley Delk; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; John D Christein; Carlo Contreras; James A Posey; Selwyn Vickers; Robert Oster; Laura Q Rogers Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2016-04-30 Impact factor: 4.442