Hanna van Waart1, Laurien M Buffart2,3, Martijn M Stuiver4,5, Wim H van Harten1,6, Gabe S Sonke7, Neil K Aaronson8. 1. Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 2. Departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Medical Oncology, the Amsterdam Pubic Health research institute and Cancer Center, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Exercise Medicine Research Institute, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Australia. 4. Center for Quality of Life, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 5. ACHIEVE Center for Applied Research, Faculty of Health, Amsterdam University of Applied Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Health Technology and Services Research, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 8. Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. n.aaronson@nki.nl.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In this study, we investigated factors associated with program adherence and patient satisfaction with a home-based physical activity program (Onco-Move, N = 77) and a supervised exercise program with a home-based component (OnTrack, N = 76). METHODS: We assessed adherence via self-report (home-based program) and attendance records (supervised program). We used logistic regression analysis to identify sociodemographic, clinical and behavioural variables associated with program adherence. Patient satisfaction was assessed with self-report and is reported descriptively. RESULTS: Fifty-one percent of Onco-Move and 62% of OnTrack participants were adherent to the home-based program, while 59% of OnTrack participants were adherent to the supervised sessions. Higher baseline physical fitness was associated with higher adherence to home-based components. Higher disease stage and having a partner were associated with adherence to OnTrack supervised sessions. Overall satisfaction with the exercise programs was high, but ratings of coaching provided by professionals for the home-based components were low. Patients offered suggestions for improving delivery of the programs. CONCLUSIONS: These findings point to factors relevant to program adherence and suggest ways in which such programs can be improved. Providing additional time and training for health care professionals could improve the quality and hopefully the effectiveness of the interventions. The use of online diaries and smartphone apps may provide additional encouragement to participants. Finally, allowing greater flexibility in the planning and availability of supervised exercise training in order to accommodate the variability in cancer treatment schedules and the (acute) side effects of the treatments could also enhance program adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR2159. http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=2159.
PURPOSE: In this study, we investigated factors associated with program adherence and patient satisfaction with a home-based physical activity program (Onco-Move, N = 77) and a supervised exercise program with a home-based component (OnTrack, N = 76). METHODS: We assessed adherence via self-report (home-based program) and attendance records (supervised program). We used logistic regression analysis to identify sociodemographic, clinical and behavioural variables associated with program adherence. Patient satisfaction was assessed with self-report and is reported descriptively. RESULTS: Fifty-one percent of Onco-Move and 62% of OnTrack participants were adherent to the home-based program, while 59% of OnTrack participants were adherent to the supervised sessions. Higher baseline physical fitness was associated with higher adherence to home-based components. Higher disease stage and having a partner were associated with adherence to OnTrack supervised sessions. Overall satisfaction with the exercise programs was high, but ratings of coaching provided by professionals for the home-based components were low. Patients offered suggestions for improving delivery of the programs. CONCLUSIONS: These findings point to factors relevant to program adherence and suggest ways in which such programs can be improved. Providing additional time and training for health care professionals could improve the quality and hopefully the effectiveness of the interventions. The use of online diaries and smartphone apps may provide additional encouragement to participants. Finally, allowing greater flexibility in the planning and availability of supervised exercise training in order to accommodate the variability in cancer treatment schedules and the (acute) side effects of the treatments could also enhance program adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR2159. http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=2159.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adherence; Breast cancer; Chemotherapy; Exercise; Patient satisfaction; Physical activity
Authors: Hanna van Waart; Johanna M van Dongen; Wim H van Harten; Martijn M Stuiver; Rosalie Huijsmans; Jeannette A J H Hellendoorn-van Vreeswijk; Gabe S Sonke; Neil K Aaronson Journal: Eur J Health Econ Date: 2017-10-30
Authors: Hanna van Waart; Wim H van Harten; Laurien M Buffart; Gabe S Sonke; Martijn M Stuiver; Neil K Aaronson Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2015-08-17 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1993-03-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Ingrid C De Backer; Goof Schep; Adwin Hoogeveen; Gerard Vreugdenhil; Arnold D Kester; Eric van Breda Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Kerry S Courneya; Roanne J Segal; Karen Gelmon; Robert D Reid; John R Mackey; Christine M Friedenreich; Caroline Proulx; Kirstin Lane; Aliya B Ladha; Jeffrey K Vallance; Donald C McKenzie Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Christine M Friedenreich; Kerry S Courneya; Sameer M Siddiqi; Anne McTiernan; Catherine M Alfano Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2012-05-08 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Iris M Kanera; Roy A Willems; Catherine A W Bolman; Ilse Mesters; Peter Verboon; Lilian Lechner Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2017-02-10 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Luiz Augusto Riani Costa; Raphael F Barreto; Sarah Milani Moraes de Leandrini; Aline Rachel Bezerra Gurgel; Gabriel Toledo de Sales; Vanessa Azevedo Voltarelli; Gilberto de Castro; Sally A M Fenton; James E Turner; Christian Klausener; Lucas Melo Neves; Carlos Ugrinowitsch; Jose Carlos Farah; Cláudia Lúcia de Moraes Forjaz; Christina May Moran Brito; Patricia Chakur Brum Journal: Trials Date: 2021-12-18 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Emily R Dunston; Yang Bai; Maria Newton; Leslie Podlog; Darren Walker; Sonal Oza; Rebecca W Zingg; Pamela A Hansen; Adriana M Coletta Journal: Integr Cancer Ther Date: 2022 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.077