Ashlea Braun1, James Portner2, Elizabeth M Grainger3, Emily B Hill1, Gregory S Young4, Steven K Clinton5, Colleen K Spees6. 1. Medical Dietetics and Health Sciences, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH. 2. Ohio State University College of Social Work, Columbus, OH. 3. Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH. 4. Center for Biostatistics, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH. 5. Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH; Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH. 6. Medical Dietetics and Health Sciences, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH; Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH. Electronic address: Spees.11@osu.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Determine the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of tele-Motivational Interviewing (MI) for overweight cancer survivors. DESIGN: Six-month nonrandomized phase 2 clinical trial. SETTING: Urban garden and remote platforms. PARTICIPANTS: Overweight and obese cancer survivors post active treatment. INTERVENTION: Remote tele-MI from a trained registered dietitian nutritionist (RDN). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy. ANALYSIS: Groups were stratified as users and nonusers based on tele-MI use. Qualitative survey data and remote MI interaction logs were analyzed for trends. Two-sample t tests were performed to assess pre-post intervention changes in physical activity and dietary behaviors, quality of life, self-efficacy, and clinical biomarkers. RESULTS: A total of 29 participants completed the intervention. There were 17 tele-MI users (59%) and 12 nonusers (41%). Users were primarily female (88%), breast cancer survivors (59%), college educated (82%), with a mean age of 58 years. Users set 50% more goals, lost more weight (4.8 vs 2.6 kg), significantly improved quality of life (P = .03), and trended more positively in clinical biomarkers (eg, cholesterol, blood pressure) than did nonusers. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Findings from this study indicate that tele-MI is a feasible and acceptable intervention for overweight cancer survivors after active therapy. Larger randomized trials are needed to establish efficacy and generalizability to a variety of demographic populations.
OBJECTIVE: Determine the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of tele-Motivational Interviewing (MI) for overweight cancer survivors. DESIGN: Six-month nonrandomized phase 2 clinical trial. SETTING: Urban garden and remote platforms. PARTICIPANTS: Overweight and obese cancer survivors post active treatment. INTERVENTION: Remote tele-MI from a trained registered dietitian nutritionist (RDN). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy. ANALYSIS: Groups were stratified as users and nonusers based on tele-MI use. Qualitative survey data and remote MI interaction logs were analyzed for trends. Two-sample t tests were performed to assess pre-post intervention changes in physical activity and dietary behaviors, quality of life, self-efficacy, and clinical biomarkers. RESULTS: A total of 29 participants completed the intervention. There were 17 tele-MI users (59%) and 12 nonusers (41%). Users were primarily female (88%), breast cancer survivors (59%), college educated (82%), with a mean age of 58 years. Users set 50% more goals, lost more weight (4.8 vs 2.6 kg), significantly improved quality of life (P = .03), and trended more positively in clinical biomarkers (eg, cholesterol, blood pressure) than did nonusers. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Findings from this study indicate that tele-MI is a feasible and acceptable intervention for overweight cancer survivors after active therapy. Larger randomized trials are needed to establish efficacy and generalizability to a variety of demographic populations.
Authors: Jane M Armer; Robin P Shook; Melanie K Schneider; Constance W Brooks; Julie Peterson; Bob R Stewart Journal: Self Care Depend Care Nurs Date: 2009-10
Authors: Patricia M Guenther; Kellie O Casavale; Jill Reedy; Sharon I Kirkpatrick; Hazel A B Hiza; Kevin J Kuczynski; Lisa L Kahle; Susan M Krebs-Smith Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2013-02-13 Impact factor: 4.910
Authors: Jennifer A Ligibel; Catherine M Alfano; Dawn Hershman; Rachel M Ballard; Suanna S Bruinooge; Kerry S Courneya; Elvan C Daniels; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Elizabeth S Frank; Pamela J Goodwin; Melinda L Irwin; Laura A Levit; Worta McCaskill-Stevens; Lori M Minasian; Mark A O'Rourke; John P Pierce; Kevin D Stein; Cynthia A Thomson; Clifford A Hudis Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-08-31 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Anna L Hawkes; Suzanne K Chambers; Kenneth I Pakenham; Tania A Patrao; Peter D Baade; Brigid M Lynch; Joanne F Aitken; Xingqiong Meng; Kerry S Courneya Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-05-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Laura Dennison; Leanne Morrison; Scott Lloyd; Dawn Phillips; Beth Stuart; Sarah Williams; Katherine Bradbury; Paul Roderick; Elizabeth Murray; Susan Michie; Paul Little; Lucy Yardley Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Colleen K Spees; Ashlea C Braun; Emily B Hill; Elizabeth M Grainger; James Portner; Gregory S Young; Matthew D Kleinhenz; Chureeporn Chitchumroonchokchai; Steven K Clinton Journal: J Oncol Date: 2019-11-21 Impact factor: 4.375
Authors: Janice A Chilton; Monica L Rasmus; Jay Lytton; Charles D Kaplan; Lovell A Jones; Thelma C Hurd Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2018-08-10 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Quynh Pham; Jason Hearn; Bruce Gao; Ian Brown; Robert J Hamilton; Alejandro Berlin; Joseph A Cafazzo; Andrew Feifer Journal: NPJ Digit Med Date: 2020-09-02