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 ?
Safety and efficacy of aerobic training in patients with cancer who have heart failure: an analysis of the HF-ACTION randomized trial.
PURPOSE To investigate the efficacy and safety of aerobic training ( AT ) in patients with cancer with medically stable heart failure ( HF ) . PATIENTS AND METHODS A retrospective analysis of 90 patients with cancer who have HF and who were r and omly assigned to AT ( n = 47 ) or guideline -based usual care ( UC ; n = 43 ) was performed . AT consisted of three supervised sessions per week at 20 to 45 minutes per session at 60 % to 70 % of heart rate reserve for 12 weeks followed by home-based sessions for 4 to 12 months . The primary end point was all-cause mortality and hospitalization . Secondary end points were other clinical events , safety , and change in exercise capacity ( VO(2peak ) ) and health-related quality of life ( HRQOL ) . RESULTS Median follow-up was 35 months . In intention-to-treat ( ITT ) analyses , all-cause mortality or hospitalization at 2 years was 74 % in the AT group compared with 67 % in the UC group ( adjusted hazard ratio [ HR ] , 1.11 ; 95 % CI , 0.69 to 1.77 ; P = .676 ) . The incidence of cardiovascular mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization was significantly higher in the AT group compared with the UC group ( 41 % v 67 % ; adjusted HR , 1.94 ; 95 % CI , 1.12 to 3.16 ; P = .017 ) . There were no differences in any VO(2peak ) or HRQOL end points . In post hoc analyses based on adherence to AT , all-cause mortality and hospitalization was 66 % in adherent patients ( ≥ 90 minutes per week ) compared with 84 % in nonadherent patients ( < 90 minutes per week ) . CONCLUSION In ITT analyses , AT did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with cancer who had HF . Post hoc analyses suggested that patients not capable of adhering to the planned AT prescription may be at increased risk of clinical events
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 ?