Saïd Ibeggazene1, Rebecca Turner2, Derek Rosario3, Liam Bourke2. 1. College of Health, Wellbeing and Life Sciences, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK. s.ibeggazene@shu.ac.uk. 2. College of Health, Wellbeing and Life Sciences, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK. 3. Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced many cancer services to consider a transition to a remote format of delivery that is largely untested. Accordingly, we sought to perform a systematic review of the effects of remotely delivered interventions to improve exercise behaviour in sedentary adults living with and beyond cancer. METHODS: Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials comparing a remotely delivered exercise intervention to a usual care comparison in sedentary people over 18 years old with a primary cancer diagnosis. Nine electronic databases were searched from inception to November 2020. RESULTS: The review included three trials, totalling 186 participants. Two of the included trials incorporated prescriptions that meet current aerobic exercise recommendations, one of which also meets the guidelines for resistance exercise. No trials reported an intervention adherence of 75% or more for a set prescription that meets current exercise guidelines. CONCLUSION: There is little evidence suggesting that remote exercise interventions promote exercise behaviours or improve physical function in sedentary adults living with and beyond cancer. The development and evaluation of novel remote exercise interventions is needed to establish their usefulness for clinical practice. Given the social response to the COVID-19 pandemic, further research in this area is urgently needed.
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced many cancer services to consider a transition to a remote format of delivery that is largely untested. Accordingly, we sought to perform a systematic review of the effects of remotely delivered interventions to improve exercise behaviour in sedentary adults living with and beyond cancer. METHODS: Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials comparing a remotely delivered exercise intervention to a usual care comparison in sedentary people over 18 years old with a primary cancer diagnosis. Nine electronic databases were searched from inception to November 2020. RESULTS: The review included three trials, totalling 186 participants. Two of the included trials incorporated prescriptions that meet current aerobic exercise recommendations, one of which also meets the guidelines for resistance exercise. No trials reported an intervention adherence of 75% or more for a set prescription that meets current exercise guidelines. CONCLUSION: There is little evidence suggesting that remote exercise interventions promote exercise behaviours or improve physical function in sedentary adults living with and beyond cancer. The development and evaluation of novel remote exercise interventions is needed to establish their usefulness for clinical practice. Given the social response to the COVID-19 pandemic, further research in this area is urgently needed.
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: Ana D Goode; Sheleigh P Lawler; Charlotte L Brakenridge; Marina M Reeves; Elizabeth G Eakin Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2015-03-11 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Ding Ding; Kenny D Lawson; Tracy L Kolbe-Alexander; Eric A Finkelstein; Peter T Katzmarzyk; Willem van Mechelen; Michael Pratt Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-07-28 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Lawson Eng; Dan Pringle; Jie Su; XiaoWei Shen; Mary Mahler; Chongya Niu; Rebecca Charow; Kyoko Tiessen; Christine Lam; Oleksandr Halytskyy; Hiten Naik; Henrique Hon; Margaret Irwin; Vivien Pat; Christina Gonos; Catherine Chan; Jodie Villeneuve; Luke Harland; Ravi M Shani; M Catherine Brown; Peter Selby; Doris Howell; Wei Xu; Geoffrey Liu; Shabbir M H Alibhai; Jennifer M Jones Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-05-29 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: L Bourke; K E Homer; M A Thaha; L Steed; D J Rosario; K A Robb; J M Saxton; S J C Taylor Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-12-12 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Teri W Hoenemeyer; William W Cole; Robert A Oster; Dorothy W Pekmezi; Andrea Pye; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-02-21 Impact factor: 6.575