S Lawler1, G Maher2, M Brennan3, A Goode2, M M Reeves2, E Eakin2. 1. Cancer Prevention Research Centre, School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. s.lawler@uq.edu.au. 2. Cancer Prevention Research Centre, School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 3. Westmead Breast Cancer Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This pilot study assessed the feasibility, acceptability and outcomes of referring breast cancer survivors to the 'Get Healthy Service' (GHS), a state health-funded 6-month telephone-delivered lifestyle program. METHODS: Pre-post study with eligible and consenting women following treatment for stages I-III breast cancer referred by nurses in a cancer treatment centre to the GHS. Feasibility was assessed via GHS uptake and completion; acceptability was assessed via patient satisfaction and nurse feedback. Changes in weight, physical activity, diet, quality of life (QoL) and fatigue from baseline to 6 months were examined. RESULTS: Fifty-three women (mean ± SD body mass index, 31.0 ± 5.5 kg/m2; age, 57.3 ± 10.0 years; 14.0 ± 7.1 months post-diagnosis; 43.4% born outside Australia, 49% high school or less education, 32.1% English as a second language) took up the GHS, with 62% completing the program. Almost all (92%) completers had high satisfaction ratings and breast nurses provided positive feedback. Findings from GHS completers (n = 33) show a statistically significant effect from baseline to 6 months for weight loss (mean ± SE; -2.4 ± 0.7 kg; p = 0.002) and total physical activity minutes per week (55 ± 18 min/week; p = 0.006). No significant changes in fruit or vegetable servings per day or takeaways and fast food frequency per week were observed. A significant improvement in mental QoL was observed (3.5 ± 1.6; p = 0.041), but not for physical QoL or fatigue. CONCLUSION: GHS referral appeared feasible, acceptable and effective for a diverse group of women following completion of treatment for breast cancer, yet more remains to be done to fully integrate GHS screening and referral into usual care.
PURPOSE: This pilot study assessed the feasibility, acceptability and outcomes of referring breast cancer survivors to the 'Get Healthy Service' (GHS), a state health-funded 6-month telephone-delivered lifestyle program. METHODS: Pre-post study with eligible and consenting women following treatment for stages I-III breast cancer referred by nurses in a cancer treatment centre to the GHS. Feasibility was assessed via GHS uptake and completion; acceptability was assessed via patient satisfaction and nurse feedback. Changes in weight, physical activity, diet, quality of life (QoL) and fatigue from baseline to 6 months were examined. RESULTS: Fifty-three women (mean ± SD body mass index, 31.0 ± 5.5 kg/m2; age, 57.3 ± 10.0 years; 14.0 ± 7.1 months post-diagnosis; 43.4% born outside Australia, 49% high school or less education, 32.1% English as a second language) took up the GHS, with 62% completing the program. Almost all (92%) completers had high satisfaction ratings and breast nurses provided positive feedback. Findings from GHS completers (n = 33) show a statistically significant effect from baseline to 6 months for weight loss (mean ± SE; -2.4 ± 0.7 kg; p = 0.002) and total physical activity minutes per week (55 ± 18 min/week; p = 0.006). No significant changes in fruit or vegetable servings per day or takeaways and fast food frequency per week were observed. A significant improvement in mental QoL was observed (3.5 ± 1.6; p = 0.041), but not for physical QoL or fatigue. CONCLUSION: GHS referral appeared feasible, acceptable and effective for a diverse group of women following completion of treatment for breast cancer, yet more remains to be done to fully integrate GHS screening and referral into usual care.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Diet; Exercise; Physical activity; Survivorship; Telephone coaching
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: Michael D Jensen; Donna H Ryan; Caroline M Apovian; Jamy D Ard; Anthony G Comuzzie; Karen A Donato; Frank B Hu; Van S Hubbard; John M Jakicic; Robert F Kushner; Catherine M Loria; Barbara E Millen; Cathy A Nonas; F Xavier Pi-Sunyer; June Stevens; Victor J Stevens; Thomas A Wadden; Bruce M Wolfe; Susan Z Yanovski; Harmon S Jordan; Karima A Kendall; Linda J Lux; Roycelynn Mentor-Marcel; Laura C Morgan; Michael G Trisolini; Janusz Wnek; Jeffrey L Anderson; Jonathan L Halperin; Nancy M Albert; Biykem Bozkurt; Ralph G Brindis; Lesley H Curtis; David DeMets; Judith S Hochman; Richard J Kovacs; E Magnus Ohman; Susan J Pressler; Frank W Sellke; Win-Kuang Shen; Sidney C Smith; Gordon F Tomaselli Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Narelle M Berry; Michelle D Miller; Richard J Woodman; John Coveney; James Dollman; Catherine R Mackenzie; Bogda Koczwara Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2014-07-21 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Danny R Youlden; Susanna M Cramb; Nathan A M Dunn; Jennifer M Muller; Christopher M Pyke; Peter D Baade Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Date: 2012-03-27 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: M E Whelan; A D Goode; E G Eakin; J L Veerman; E A H Winkler; I J Hickman; M M Reeves Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Blythe J O'Hara; Philayrath Phongsavan; Kamalesh Venugopal; Elizabeth G Eakin; Dianne Eggins; Hugh Caterson; Lesley King; Margaret Allman-Farinelli; Marion Haas; Adrian E Bauman Journal: Prev Med Date: 2012-08-04 Impact factor: 4.018
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: Daniela L Stan; Susanne M Cutshall; Tammy F Adams; Karthik Ghosh; Matthew M Clark; Kaisa C Wieneke; Esayas B Kebede; Bonnie J Donelan Dunlap; Kathryn J Ruddy; Jennifer K Hazelton; Alissa M Butts; Sarah M Jenkins; Ivana T Croghan; Brent A Bauer Journal: Clin J Oncol Nurs Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 1.027
Authors: Elizabeth G Eakin; Marina M Reeves; Ana D Goode; Elisabeth A H Winkler; Janette L Vardy; Frances Boyle; Marion R Haas; Janet E Hiller; Gita D Mishra; Michael Jefford; Bogda Koczwara; Christobel M Saunders; Kathy Chapman; Liz Hing; Anna G Boltong; Katherine Lane; Polly Baldwin; Lesley Millar; Sandy McKiernan; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Kerry S Courneya; Jennifer Job; Natasha Reid; Erin Robson; Nicole Moretto; Louisa Gordon; Sandra C Hayes Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2020-10-06 Impact factor: 4.430
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