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 ?
The effect of resistance inspiratory muscle training in the management of breathlessness in patients with thoracic malignancies: a feasibility randomised trial
Objectives Breathlessness in patients with lung cancer is a common and distressing symptom affecting 50–70 % of patients , rising to some 90 % for those with advanced lung cancer . The aim of the current study was to assess how feasible inspiratory muscle training ( IMT ) is in the lung cancer population and explore changes in outcome variables . Material s and methods A pilot feasibility r and omised trial was conducted in patients with clinical ly stable lung cancer . The experimental group received training using a pressure threshold device . Patients were instructed to carry out five IMT sessions weekly for 12 weeks for a total of 30 mins/day . Patients in the control group received st and ard care . Outcome measures were completed at baseline and monthly for 3 months , and included : physiological parameters ( FEV1 , FVC ) ; perceived severity of breathlessness using six 10-point NRS ; modified Borg Scale ; quality of life using the short form Chronic Respiratory Disease Question naire ; Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale , and safety .  Results Forty-six patients ( M = 37 , F = 9 ) at a mean age of 69.5 years old and a mean of 16 months post-diagnosis who were not currently receiving chemotherapy and /or radiotherapy were recruited . Seventy-percent had NSCLC and advanced disease . Statistical ( area under the curve-AUC ) and clinical ly important differences were seen with regard to distress from breathlessness ( p = 0.03 ) , ability to cope with breathlessness ( p = 0.01 ) , satisfaction with breathlessness management ( p = 0.001 ) , fatigue ( p = 0.005 ) , emotional function ( p = 0.011 ) , breathlessness mastery ( p = 0.015 ) and depression ( p = 0.028 ) . The m-Borg difference between the two groups at 3 months was 0.80 , which is borderline clinical ly significant . Changes were more evident in the 3-month assessment where the effect of the intervention came to its peak . Conclusion This trial shows the IMT is feasible and potentially effective in patients with lung cancer . These findings warrant a fully powered larger r and omised controlled trial
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 ?