Crystal L Park1, Dalnim Cho2, Andrew L Salner3, Ellen Dornelas3. 1. Department of Psychology, University of Connecticut, 406 Babbidge Rd, Unit 1020, Storrs, CT, 06269-1020, USA. crystal.park@uconn.edu. 2. Department of Psychology, University of Connecticut, 406 Babbidge Rd, Unit 1020, Storrs, CT, 06269-1020, USA. 3. Helen & Harry Gray Cancer Center, Hartford Hospital, 85 Retreat Ave, Hartford, CT, 06106, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Although breast cancer survivors' lifestyle choices affect their subsequent health, a majority do not engage in healthy behaviors. Because treatment end is a "teachable moment" for potentially altering lifestyle change for breast cancer survivors, we developed and tested two mail-based interventions for women who recently completed primary treatment. METHODS:One hundred seventy-three survivors were randomly assigned to (1) Targeting the Teachable Moment (TTMI, n = 57), (2) Standard Lifestyle Management (SLM, n = 58), or (3) usual care (UC, n = 58) control group. Participants who were assigned to TTMI and SLM received relevant treatment materials biweekly for 4 months. Participants were assessed at baseline (T1, before randomization), post-treatment (T2, 4 months), and follow-up (T3, 7 months). Fruit and vegetable (F/V) intake, fat intake, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) were assessed. RESULTS: Results showed promise for these mail-based interventions for changes in health behaviors: Survivors in TTMI (+.47) and SLM (+.45) reported increased F/V intake, whereas those in UC (-.1) reported decreased F/V intake from T1 to T2. Changes in minutes of MVPA from T1 to T2 were higher in SLM than UC and marginally higher in TTMI than UC. However, these differences were due to decreased MVPA in UC rather than increased MVPA in the intervention groups. There were no group differences regarding fat intake. Survivors reported high satisfaction and preference for mail-based interventions, supporting feasibility. CONCLUSIONS:Mail-based lifestyle interventions for breast cancer survivors may benefit F/V intake and physical activity. Further testing and optimizing of these interventions is warranted.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Although breast cancer survivors' lifestyle choices affect their subsequent health, a majority do not engage in healthy behaviors. Because treatment end is a "teachable moment" for potentially altering lifestyle change for breast cancer survivors, we developed and tested two mail-based interventions for women who recently completed primary treatment. METHODS: One hundred seventy-three survivors were randomly assigned to (1) Targeting the Teachable Moment (TTMI, n = 57), (2) Standard Lifestyle Management (SLM, n = 58), or (3) usual care (UC, n = 58) control group. Participants who were assigned to TTMI and SLM received relevant treatment materials biweekly for 4 months. Participants were assessed at baseline (T1, before randomization), post-treatment (T2, 4 months), and follow-up (T3, 7 months). Fruit and vegetable (F/V) intake, fat intake, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) were assessed. RESULTS: Results showed promise for these mail-based interventions for changes in health behaviors: Survivors in TTMI (+.47) and SLM (+.45) reported increased F/V intake, whereas those in UC (-.1) reported decreased F/V intake from T1 to T2. Changes in minutes of MVPA from T1 to T2 were higher in SLM than UC and marginally higher in TTMI than UC. However, these differences were due to decreased MVPA in UC rather than increased MVPA in the intervention groups. There were no group differences regarding fat intake. Survivors reported high satisfaction and preference for mail-based interventions, supporting feasibility. CONCLUSIONS: Mail-based lifestyle interventions for breast cancer survivors may benefit F/V intake and physical activity. Further testing and optimizing of these interventions is warranted.
Entities:
Keywords:
Dietary behaviors; Mail-based intervention; Physical activity; Teachable moment
Authors: Chris M Blanchard; Maxine M Denniston; Frank Baker; Stuart R Ainsworth; Kerry S Courneya; Danette M Hann; Dean H Gesme; Douglas Reding; Thomas Flynn; John S Kennedy Journal: Am J Health Behav Date: 2003 May-Jun
Authors: Kathryn H Schmitz; Jeremy Holtzman; Kerry S Courneya; Louise C Mâsse; Sue Duval; Robert Kane Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: John P Pierce; Loki Natarajan; Bette J Caan; Barbara A Parker; E Robert Greenberg; Shirley W Flatt; Cheryl L Rock; Sheila Kealey; Wael K Al-Delaimy; Wayne A Bardwell; Robert W Carlson; Jennifer A Emond; Susan Faerber; Ellen B Gold; Richard A Hajek; Kathryn Hollenbach; Lovell A Jones; Njeri Karanja; Lisa Madlensky; James Marshall; Vicky A Newman; Cheryl Ritenbaugh; Cynthia A Thomson; Linda Wasserman; Marcia L Stefanick Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-07-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Crystal N Holick; Polly A Newcomb; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Linda Titus-Ernstoff; Andrew J Bersch; Meir J Stampfer; John A Baron; Kathleen M Egan; Walter C Willett Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2008-02-04 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Elizabeth C Clipp; Isaac M Lipkus; David Lobach; Denise Clutter Snyder; Richard Sloane; Bercedis Peterson; Jennifer M Macri; Cheryl L Rock; Colleen M McBride; William E Kraus Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nadja Klafke; Cornelia Mahler; Cornelia von Hagens; Lorenz Uhlmann; Martina Bentner; Andreas Schneeweiss; Andreas Mueller; Joachim Szecsenyi; Stefanie Joos Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2019-05-21 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Rebecca R Turner; Liz Steed; Helen Quirk; Rosa U Greasley; John M Saxton; Stephanie Jc Taylor; Derek J Rosario; Mohamed A Thaha; Liam Bourke Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-09-19
Authors: Sorrel Burden; Debra J Jones; Jana Sremanakova; Anne Marie Sowerbutts; Simon Lal; Mark Pilling; Chris Todd Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-11-22