S Sattar1, K R Haase2, C Bradley3, E Papadopoulos4, S Kuster5, D Santa Mina4,6, M Tippe7, A Kaur8, D Campbell8, A M Joshua9, C Rediger10, O Souied11, S Alibhai6,12. 1. College of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Regina, SK, Canada. Schroder.sattar@usask.ca. 2. Faculty of Applied Science, School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 3. Library, University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada. 4. Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 5. Faculty of Kinesiology and Health Studies, University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada. 6. University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. 7. Patient consultant, Toronto, ON, Canada. 8. College of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada. 9. Department of Medical Oncology, Kinghorn Cancer Centre; Faculty of Medicine, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 10. Saskatchewan Health Authority, Regina, SK, Canada. 11. Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada. 12. Department of Medicine, Institute of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PC) and its treatments lead to significant acute, chronic, or latent adverse effects that result in declines in patients' physical functions, quality of life and reduced sense of masculinities. Robust evidence shows that physical activity (PA) can improve many health outcomes in men with PC; however, less is known about the facilitators, preferences, and barriers to PA engagement in this population. The purpose of this scoping review is to document the nature and extent of literature related to these aspects of PA participation among men with PC. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of PA among men with PC. Databases searched included Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Rehabilitation & Sports Medicine Source, and SportDiscus from inception to June 30, 2020. Multiple reviewers were used in all screening and data abstractions. RESULTS: The search yielded 2788 individual citations after duplicates were removed. Following title and abstract screening, 129 underwent full-text review, and 46 articles were included. Quantitative data related to our research question showed that structured group exercise was the most commonly reported facilitator/preference among men with PC, whereas treatment-related effects and lack of time are the most common barriers. In terms of qualitative data, the most prominent theme noted related to masculinities and gender-specific needs within the context of having PC. CONCLUSION: Men with PC have unique facilitators and barriers concerning PA. More work is needed from the research and clinical practice perspectives to enable this population to engage and remain in regular PA.
BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PC) and its treatments lead to significant acute, chronic, or latent adverse effects that result in declines in patients' physical functions, quality of life and reduced sense of masculinities. Robust evidence shows that physical activity (PA) can improve many health outcomes in men with PC; however, less is known about the facilitators, preferences, and barriers to PA engagement in this population. The purpose of this scoping review is to document the nature and extent of literature related to these aspects of PA participation among men with PC. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of PA among men with PC. Databases searched included Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Rehabilitation & Sports Medicine Source, and SportDiscus from inception to June 30, 2020. Multiple reviewers were used in all screening and data abstractions. RESULTS: The search yielded 2788 individual citations after duplicates were removed. Following title and abstract screening, 129 underwent full-text review, and 46 articles were included. Quantitative data related to our research question showed that structured group exercise was the most commonly reported facilitator/preference among men with PC, whereas treatment-related effects and lack of time are the most common barriers. In terms of qualitative data, the most prominent theme noted related to masculinities and gender-specific needs within the context of having PC. CONCLUSION: Men with PC have unique facilitators and barriers concerning PA. More work is needed from the research and clinical practice perspectives to enable this population to engage and remain in regular PA.
Authors: Christine M Friedenreich; Qinggang Wang; Heather K Neilson; Karen A Kopciuk; S Elizabeth McGregor; Kerry S Courneya Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2016-01-07 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Daniel A Galvão; Nigel A Spry; Dennis R Taaffe; Robert U Newton; John Stanley; Tom Shannon; Chris Rowling; Richard Prince Journal: BJU Int Date: 2008-03-11 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Mai T Pham; Andrijana Rajić; Judy D Greig; Jan M Sargeant; Andrew Papadopoulos; Scott A McEwen Journal: Res Synth Methods Date: 2014-07-24 Impact factor: 5.273
Authors: Agnes Grudniewicz; Michelle Nelson; Kerry Kuluski; Vincci Lui; Heather V Cunningham; Jason X Nie; Heather Colquhoun; Walter P Wodchis; Susan Taylor; Mayura Loganathan; Ross E Upshur Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-05-25 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Andy Pringle; Nicky Kime; Stephen Zwolinsky; Zoe Rutherford; Clare M P Roscoe Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-03 Impact factor: 3.390