Interventions to promote exercise in cancer survivors who report better levels of adherence share some common behaviour change techniques .
These involve setting programme goals , prompting practise and self-monitoring and encouraging participants to attempt to generalise behaviours learned in supervised exercise environments to other , non-supervised context s. However , expecting most sedentary survivors to achieve current guideline recommendations of at least 150 minutes per week of aerobic exercise is likely to be unrealistic .
BACKGROUND The beneficial effects of regular exercise for people living with or beyond cancer are becoming apparent .
However , how to promote exercise behaviour in sedentary cancer cohorts is not as well understood .
A large majority of people living with or recovering from cancer do not meet exercise recommendations .
Hence , review ing the evidence on how to promote and sustain exercise behaviour is important .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of interventions to promote exercise behaviour in sedentary people living with and beyond cancer and to address the following questions : Which interventions are most effective in improving aerobic fitness and skeletal muscle strength and endurance ?
What adverse effects are attributed to different exercise interventions ?
Which interventions are most effective in improving exercise behaviour amongst patients with different cancers ?
Which interventions are most likely to promote long-term ( 12 months or longer ) exercise behaviour ?
What frequency of contact with exercise professionals is associated with increased exercise behaviour ?
What theoretical basis is most often associated with increased exercise behaviour ?
What behaviour change techniques are most often associated with increased exercise behaviour ?
Efficacy of a training program for long-term disease- free cancer survivors as health partners: a randomized controlled trial in Korea.
BACKGROUND To determine whether the Health Partner Program is effective in training long-term cancer survivors to be health coaches . MATERIAL S AND METHODS We r and omly assigned cancer survivors who were selected through a rigorous screening process to either the Health Partner Program or the waiting-list control group .  The program consisted of 8 weeks of training in health management , leadership , and coaching . At baseline , 8 , and 16 weeks , we measured primary outcomes using the Seven Habit Profile ( SHP ) , the Korean Leadership Coaching Competency Inventory ( KCCI ) , Ed Diner 's Satisfaction with Life Scale ( SWLS ) , and the Posttraumatic Growth inventory ( PTGI ) and secondary outcomes using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale ( HADS ) , the Impact of Event Scale-Revised ( IES-R ) , and the Medical Outcomes Study ( MOS ) short form 36-item question naire ( SF- 36 ) . RESULTS We recruited 70 subjects and r and omly assigned 34 to the intervention group . The Sharpen the Saw habit of the SHP increased significantly more in intervention group than in the control group ( p = 0.049 ) , as did most PTGI factors . The intervention group also showed a significantly greater enhancement of vitality ( p = 0.015 ) and mental health ( p = 0.049 ) SF-36 scores but no improvement in KCCI , SWLS , HADS , or IES-R scores . The intervention group also showed a greater clinical ly meaningful improvement in the " Think Win-Win " of SHP ( p = 0.043 ) and in the personal strength score ( p = 0.025 ) and total score ( p = 0.015 ) of the PTGI . CONCLUSIONS Long-term cancer survivors can benefit from the Health Partner Program to become health coaches
Interventions to promote exercise in cancer survivors who report better levels of adherence share some common behaviour change techniques .
These involve setting programme goals , prompting practise and self-monitoring and encouraging participants to attempt to generalise behaviours learned in supervised exercise environments to other , non-supervised context s. However , expecting most sedentary survivors to achieve current guideline recommendations of at least 150 minutes per week of aerobic exercise is likely to be unrealistic .
BACKGROUND The beneficial effects of regular exercise for people living with or beyond cancer are becoming apparent .
However , how to promote exercise behaviour in sedentary cancer cohorts is not as well understood .
A large majority of people living with or recovering from cancer do not meet exercise recommendations .
Hence , review ing the evidence on how to promote and sustain exercise behaviour is important .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of interventions to promote exercise behaviour in sedentary people living with and beyond cancer and to address the following questions : Which interventions are most effective in improving aerobic fitness and skeletal muscle strength and endurance ?
What adverse effects are attributed to different exercise interventions ?
Which interventions are most effective in improving exercise behaviour amongst patients with different cancers ?
Which interventions are most likely to promote long-term ( 12 months or longer ) exercise behaviour ?
What frequency of contact with exercise professionals is associated with increased exercise behaviour ?
What theoretical basis is most often associated with increased exercise behaviour ?
What behaviour change techniques are most often associated with increased exercise behaviour ?