Whitney J Smith1, Michelle Y Martin2, Maria Pisu3, Robert A Oster3, Haiyan Qu4, Richard M Shewchuk4, Mary E Sheffield5, Alex Minter5, Ana A Baumann6, Laura Q Rogers3. 1. College of Medicine, University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL. 2. Department of Preventive Medicine and Center for Innovation in Health Equity Research, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN. 3. Division of Preventive Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL. 4. Department of Health Services Administration, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL. 5. Russell Medical Center, Alexander City, AL. 6. George Warren Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Implementing efficacious physical activity interventions in real-world rural settings is needed because rural cancer survivors are more physically inactive and experience poorer health. To address this gap, this study evaluated effectiveness of an evidenced-based physical activity program (Better Exercise Adherence after Treatment for Cancer [BEAT Cancer]) for rural women cancer survivors when implemented by community-based, non-research staff. METHODS: 16 rural women cancer survivors received BEAT Cancer implemented by a rural, community organization and non-research staff; physical activity, patient-reported outcomes, and social cognitive constructs were measured at baseline and post-program. Cancer survivors and interventionists completed program evaluations post-program. RESULTS: Cancer survivor mean age was 58±12 years; 62% were White. Mean months since diagnosis was 54±72; 69% had breast cancer. Significant improvements from pre- to post-program occurred for self-report weekly minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (mean change [M] = 146±186, p = 0.009), anxiety (M = -1.3±1.8, p = 0.016), depression (M = -2.1±2.0, p = 0.001), self-efficacy (M = 20.9±30.5, p = 0.019), barriers interference (M = -15.0±14.1, p = 0.001), and social support (M = 5.0±7.4, p = 0.02). Cancer survivors ranked the program highly, identified strategies that were helpful (e.g., group activities, personalized exercise plan, etc.), and suggested additional implementation strategies (e.g., guide for home-based phase, etc.). Interventionists identified strategies (e.g., logistics, staff training and certification, cost, etc.) for enhancing organizational readiness for program delivery. CONCLUSION: Evidence-based physical activity programs can be effective when implemented by non-research staff in rural settings. Further research testing strategies that improve implementation is needed. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Effectiveness and identified strategies supporting delivery when implemented by a rural organization can improve physical activity promotion for rural, at-risk populations.
PURPOSE: Implementing efficacious physical activity interventions in real-world rural settings is needed because rural cancer survivors are more physically inactive and experience poorer health. To address this gap, this study evaluated effectiveness of an evidenced-based physical activity program (Better Exercise Adherence after Treatment for Cancer [BEAT Cancer]) for rural women cancer survivors when implemented by community-based, non-research staff. METHODS: 16 rural women cancer survivors received BEAT Cancer implemented by a rural, community organization and non-research staff; physical activity, patient-reported outcomes, and social cognitive constructs were measured at baseline and post-program. Cancer survivors and interventionists completed program evaluations post-program. RESULTS: Cancer survivor mean age was 58±12 years; 62% were White. Mean months since diagnosis was 54±72; 69% had breast cancer. Significant improvements from pre- to post-program occurred for self-report weekly minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (mean change [M] = 146±186, p = 0.009), anxiety (M = -1.3±1.8, p = 0.016), depression (M = -2.1±2.0, p = 0.001), self-efficacy (M = 20.9±30.5, p = 0.019), barriers interference (M = -15.0±14.1, p = 0.001), and social support (M = 5.0±7.4, p = 0.02). Cancer survivors ranked the program highly, identified strategies that were helpful (e.g., group activities, personalized exercise plan, etc.), and suggested additional implementation strategies (e.g., guide for home-based phase, etc.). Interventionists identified strategies (e.g., logistics, staff training and certification, cost, etc.) for enhancing organizational readiness for program delivery. CONCLUSION: Evidence-based physical activity programs can be effective when implemented by non-research staff in rural settings. Further research testing strategies that improve implementation is needed. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Effectiveness and identified strategies supporting delivery when implemented by a rural organization can improve physical activity promotion for rural, at-risk populations.
Entities:
Keywords:
exercise; oncology; program evaluation; supportive care
Authors: Laura Q Rogers; Kerry S Courneya; Robert A Oster; Philip M Anton; Randall S Robbs; Andres Forero; Edward McAuley Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Laura Q Rogers; Kerry S Courneya; Philip M Anton; Steven Verhulst; Sandra K Vicari; Randall S Robbs; Edward McAuley Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2016-09-06 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Laura Q Rogers; Kerry S Courneya; Stephen J Carter; Philip M Anton; Steven Verhulst; Sandra K Vicari; Randall S Robbs; Edward McAuley Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-08-18 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Katrina L Piercy; Richard P Troiano; Rachel M Ballard; Susan A Carlson; Janet E Fulton; Deborah A Galuska; Stephanie M George; Richard D Olson Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Eni Shehu; Sigrid Roggendorf; André Golla; Antonia Koenig; Gabriele I Stangl; Andrea Diestelhorst; Daniel Medenwald; Dirk Vordermark; Anke Steckelberg; Heike Schmidt Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-05-24 Impact factor: 6.575