Adi Kartolo1, Susanna Cheng2,3, Teresa Petrella2,3. 1. University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. adi.kartolo@mail.utoronto.ca. 2. Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada. 3. University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to investigate the motivation, ability, preferences, and perceived potential facilitating factors/barriers of patients with inoperable metastatic lung cancer towards exercise programmes. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study using survey adopting the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to obtain patients' experience recruited through Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Complex. Results were expressed in percentages, P value, and Spearman's rho. RESULTS: Sixty patients were recruited from January 2014 to April 2014. Patients generally had a high level across TPB measures, with 63% of them indicating that they have the motivation to exercise. Significant association in relation to motivation was established on attitudes (importance, P = 0.005, rho = 0.326; helpfulness, P = 0.015, rho = 0.348; and easiness, P = 0.001, rho = 0.375) and subjective norm of close members (P = 0.0069, rho = 0.348) and healthcare professionals (P = 0.012, rho = 0.328). Being a non-smoker (P = 0.042, rho = 0.311), having a past exercise history prior to diagnosis (P = 0.000, rho = 0.563), and absence of COPD (P = 0.016, rho = -0.312) were also shown to have a significant association with motivation to exercise. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: Patients were motivated to participate in an exercise programme despite contrary belief; however, they might have limited ability and preferred light intensity type of exercise such as walking. Their motivation to exercise was driven by different factors when compared to other cancer patient populations. Thus, it is important for healthcare professionals to understand the factors influencing their motivation and increase their awareness (only 26% of patients indicated receiving advice regarding exercise) to better the care towards patients with metastatic lung cancer.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to investigate the motivation, ability, preferences, and perceived potential facilitating factors/barriers of patients with inoperable metastatic lung cancer towards exercise programmes. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study using survey adopting the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to obtain patients' experience recruited through Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Complex. Results were expressed in percentages, P value, and Spearman's rho. RESULTS: Sixty patients were recruited from January 2014 to April 2014. Patients generally had a high level across TPB measures, with 63% of them indicating that they have the motivation to exercise. Significant association in relation to motivation was established on attitudes (importance, P = 0.005, rho = 0.326; helpfulness, P = 0.015, rho = 0.348; and easiness, P = 0.001, rho = 0.375) and subjective norm of close members (P = 0.0069, rho = 0.348) and healthcare professionals (P = 0.012, rho = 0.328). Being a non-smoker (P = 0.042, rho = 0.311), having a past exercise history prior to diagnosis (P = 0.000, rho = 0.563), and absence of COPD (P = 0.016, rho = -0.312) were also shown to have a significant association with motivation to exercise. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS:Patients were motivated to participate in an exercise programme despite contrary belief; however, they might have limited ability and preferred light intensity type of exercise such as walking. Their motivation to exercise was driven by different factors when compared to other cancerpatient populations. Thus, it is important for healthcare professionals to understand the factors influencing their motivation and increase their awareness (only 26% of patients indicated receiving advice regarding exercise) to better the care towards patients with metastatic lung cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
Exercise; Inoperable; Metastatic lung cancer; Theory of Planned Behaviour
Authors: Martijn A Spruit; Paul P Janssen; Sonja C P Willemsen; Monique M H Hochstenbag; Emiel F M Wouters Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2006-03-09 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Lee W Jones; Neil D Eves; William E Kraus; Anil Potti; Jeffrey Crawford; James A Blumenthal; Bercedis L Peterson; Pamela S Douglas Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2010-04-21 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Carolyn J Peddle; Lee W Jones; Neil D Eves; Tony Reiman; Christopher M Sellar; Timothy Winton; Kerry S Courneya Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Catherine L Granger; Bronwen Connolly; Linda Denehy; Nicholas Hart; Phillip Antippa; Kuan-Yin Lin; Selina M Parry Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-11-29 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Naomi Takemura; Denise Shuk Ting Cheung; Daniel Yee Tak Fong; Chia-Chin Lin Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-05-27 Impact factor: 3.359
Authors: Lara Edbrooke; Linda Denehy; Catherine L Granger; Suzanne Kapp; Sanchia Aranda Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-04-13 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Alexander Grabenbauer; Andrea J Grabenbauer; Rosa Lengenfelder; Gerhard G Grabenbauer; Luitpold V Distel Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2016-03-16 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Lara Edbrooke; Sanchia Aranda; Catherine L Granger; Christine F McDonald; Mei Krishnasamy; Linda Mileshkin; Louis Irving; Sabine Braat; Ross A Clark; Ian Gordon; Linda Denehy Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2017-09-29 Impact factor: 4.430