Nancy M Gell1, Kristin W Grover2, Morgan Humble3, Michelle Sexton3, Kim Dittus4,5. 1. Department of Rehabilitation and Movement Science, University of Vermont, 106 Carrigan Dr., Burlington, VT, 05405, USA. nancy.gell@med.uvm.edu. 2. University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, 05405, USA. 3. Department of Rehabilitation and Movement Science, University of Vermont, 106 Carrigan Dr., Burlington, VT, 05405, USA. 4. University of Vermont Cancer Center, The Courtyard at Given 4th Floor North 89 Beaumont Avenue, Burlington, VT, 05405, USA. 5. Department of Medicine, The University of Vermont Medical Center, 111 Colchester Avenue, Fletcher 311, Burlington, VT, 05401, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Physical activity is known to minimize the long-term side effects of cancer treatment. Yet, rates of physical activity participation by cancer survivors are significantly lower compared to the general population. The purpose of this pilot study was to examine the efficacy, feasibility, and acceptability of a technology-based intervention to promote maintenance of physical activity after completing an exercise-based oncology rehabilitation program. METHODS: The pre-post 4-week intervention included support delivered through tailored text messages, Fitbit® self-monitoring, and brief health coaching sessions. The primary outcome measure was accelerometer-assessed physical activity levels. Self-efficacy, self-regulation, social support, fatigue, sleep disturbance, depression, and Fitbit® step counts were assessed as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty-four participants (20 females; mean age = 57.9 years ± 10.4) completed the intervention. Mean daily step counts and weekly minutes of moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity were maintained after the intervention, as compared to baseline levels achieved at the end of 12 weeks of exercise-based oncology rehabilitation. Both self-regulation (goal setting, relapse prevention) and fatigue severity increased significantly post intervention as compared to baseline (p = 0.05 and p = 0.02, respectively). Qualitative responses demonstrated overall satisfaction with intervention components. CONCLUSIONS: Results demonstrate efficacy of the intervention for maintenance of physical activity levels achieved during exercise-based oncology rehabilitation. Low attrition and high satisfaction provide evidence for both the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention components. Exercise interventions post oncology treatment provide multiple benefits for cancer survivors, yet continued maintenance after program completion is challenging. Technological options offer low-cost, accessible modes to deliver continued monitoring and support beyond traditional facility-based programs.
PURPOSE: Physical activity is known to minimize the long-term side effects of cancer treatment. Yet, rates of physical activity participation by cancer survivors are significantly lower compared to the general population. The purpose of this pilot study was to examine the efficacy, feasibility, and acceptability of a technology-based intervention to promote maintenance of physical activity after completing an exercise-based oncology rehabilitation program. METHODS: The pre-post 4-week intervention included support delivered through tailored text messages, Fitbit® self-monitoring, and brief health coaching sessions. The primary outcome measure was accelerometer-assessed physical activity levels. Self-efficacy, self-regulation, social support, fatigue, sleep disturbance, depression, and Fitbit® step counts were assessed as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty-four participants (20 females; mean age = 57.9 years ± 10.4) completed the intervention. Mean daily step counts and weekly minutes of moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity were maintained after the intervention, as compared to baseline levels achieved at the end of 12 weeks of exercise-based oncology rehabilitation. Both self-regulation (goal setting, relapse prevention) and fatigue severity increased significantly post intervention as compared to baseline (p = 0.05 and p = 0.02, respectively). Qualitative responses demonstrated overall satisfaction with intervention components. CONCLUSIONS: Results demonstrate efficacy of the intervention for maintenance of physical activity levels achieved during exercise-based oncology rehabilitation. Low attrition and high satisfaction provide evidence for both the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention components. Exercise interventions post oncology treatment provide multiple benefits for cancer survivors, yet continued maintenance after program completion is challenging. Technological options offer low-cost, accessible modes to deliver continued monitoring and support beyond traditional facility-based programs.
Entities:
Keywords:
Fitbit®; Health coach; Physical activity; Text message
Authors: Lisa A Cadmus-Bertram; Bess H Marcus; Ruth E Patterson; Barbara A Parker; Brittany L Morey Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2015-06-10 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Suzi Hong; Wayne A Bardwell; Loki Natarajan; Shirley W Flatt; Cheryl L Rock; Vicky A Newman; Lisa Madlensky; Paul J Mills; Joel E Dimsdale; Cynthia A Thomson; Richard A Hajek; Janice A Chilton; John P Pierce Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2006-09-21 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Paul D Loprinzi; Bradley J Cardinal; Qi Si; Jill A Bennett; Kerri M Winters-Stone Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-01-15 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Lisa Cadmus-Bertram; Amye J Tevaarwerk; Mary E Sesto; Ronald Gangnon; Brittany Van Remortel; Preshita Date Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Ana M Abrantes; Donnell Van Noppen; Genie Bailey; Lisa A Uebelacker; Matthew Buman; Michael D Stein Journal: Ment Health Phys Act Date: 2021-08-14
Authors: Selina Khoo; Najihah Mohbin; Payam Ansari; Mahfoodha Al-Kitani; Andre Matthias Müller Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-05-28 Impact factor: 3.390