Teresa Corbett1, Karmpaul Singh1, Liz Payne1, Katherine Bradbury1, Claire Foster2, Eila Watson3, Alison Richardson4, Paul Little5, Lucy Yardley1,6. 1. Centre for Clinical and Community Applications of Health Psychology (CCCAHP), University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. 2. Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. 3. Department of Applied Health and Professional Development, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK. 4. Faculty of Health Sciences, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. 5. Primary Care and Population Sciences, Aldermoor Health Centre, Aldermoor Close, Southampton, UK. 6. Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This review sought to summarize existing knowledge to inform the development of an online intervention that aims to improve quality of life after cancer treatment. METHODS: To inform our intervention, we searched for studies relating to Web-based interventions designed to improve quality of life in adults who have completed primary treatment for breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer (as these are 3 of the most common cancers and impact a large number of cancer survivors). We included a variety of study designs (qualitative research, feasibility/pilot trials, randomized trials, and process evaluations) and extracted all available information regarding intervention characteristics, experiences, and outcomes. Data were synthesized as textual (qualitative) data and analyzed by using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-seven full text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 16 papers describing 9 interventions were analyzed. Our findings suggest that cancer survivors value interventions that offer content specific to their changing needs and are delivered at the right stage of the cancer trajectory. Social networking features do not always provide added benefit, and behavior change techniques need to be implemented carefully to avoid potential negative consequences for some users. CONCLUSIONS: Future work should aim to identify appropriate strategies for promoting health behavior change, as well as the optimal stage of cancer survivorship to facilitate intervention delivery. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The development of Web-based interventions for cancer survivors requires further exploration to better understand how interventions can be carefully designed to match this group's unique needs and capabilities. User involvement during development may help to ensure that interventions are accessible, perceived as useful, and appropriate for challenges faced at different stages of the cancer survivorship trajectory.
OBJECTIVE: This review sought to summarize existing knowledge to inform the development of an online intervention that aims to improve quality of life after cancer treatment. METHODS: To inform our intervention, we searched for studies relating to Web-based interventions designed to improve quality of life in adults who have completed primary treatment for breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer (as these are 3 of the most common cancers and impact a large number of cancer survivors). We included a variety of study designs (qualitative research, feasibility/pilot trials, randomized trials, and process evaluations) and extracted all available information regarding intervention characteristics, experiences, and outcomes. Data were synthesized as textual (qualitative) data and analyzed by using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-seven full text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 16 papers describing 9 interventions were analyzed. Our findings suggest that cancer survivors value interventions that offer content specific to their changing needs and are delivered at the right stage of the cancer trajectory. Social networking features do not always provide added benefit, and behavior change techniques need to be implemented carefully to avoid potential negative consequences for some users. CONCLUSIONS: Future work should aim to identify appropriate strategies for promoting health behavior change, as well as the optimal stage of cancer survivorship to facilitate intervention delivery. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The development of Web-based interventions for cancer survivors requires further exploration to better understand how interventions can be carefully designed to match this group's unique needs and capabilities. User involvement during development may help to ensure that interventions are accessible, perceived as useful, and appropriate for challenges faced at different stages of the cancer survivorship trajectory.
Authors: Jacqueline N Casillas; Lindsay F Schwartz; Catherine M Crespi; Patricia A Ganz; Katherine L Kahn; Margaret L Stuber; Roshan Bastani; Faisal Alquaddomi; Deborah L Estrin Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2019-07-26 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Angela Mifsud; Melissa J Pehlivan; Paul Fam; Maddison O'Grady; Annamiek van Steensel; Elisabeth Elder; Jenny Gilchrist; Kerry A Sherman Journal: Health Psychol Behav Med Date: 2021-05-21
Authors: Erin K Tagai; Suzanne M Miller; Shawna V Hudson; Michael A Diefenbach; Elizabeth Handorf; Alicja Bator; Allison Marziliano; Alexander Kutikov; Simon J Hall; Manish Vira; Michael Schwartz; Issac Yi Kim; Sung Kim Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2021-04-28 Impact factor: 3.955
Authors: Lorraine Warrington; Kate Absolom; Mark Conner; Ian Kellar; Beverly Clayton; Michael Ayres; Galina Velikova Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2019-01-24 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Adele Krusche; Katherine Bradbury; Teresa Corbett; Jane Barnett; Beth Stuart; Guiqing Lily Yao; Roger Bacon; Dankmar Böhning; Tara Cheetham-Blake; Diana Eccles; Claire Foster; Adam William Alfred Geraghty; Geraldine Leydon; Andre Müller; Richard D Neal; Richard Osborne; Shanaya Rathod; Alison Richardson; Geoffrey Sharman; Kevin Summers; Eila Watson; Laura Wilde; Clare Wilkinson; Lucy Yardley; Paul Little Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-03-01 Impact factor: 2.692