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 ?
Pedometer-facilitated walking intervention shows promising effectiveness for reducing cancer fatigue: a pilot randomized trial
Objective : Mechanisms for cancer related fatigue suggest that exercise but “ not too much and not too little ” could be effective . This study aim ed to investigate feasibility and estimate the potential effects of a walking exercise program in people with advanced cancer and fatigue . Design : A pilot r and omized trial . Setting : McGill University Health Centre ( MUHC ) , Montreal , Canada . Subjects : People with advanced cancer undergoing interdisciplinary assessment and rehabilitation with a fatigue level of 4 to 10 on a visual analogue scale . Interventions : An 8-week fatigue-adapted , walking intervention , facilitated using a pedometer ( STEPS ) , and offered at the same time as or after rehabilitation . Measures : Measures of fatigue , physical function and well-being were administered at entry , and 8 , 16 and 24 weeks . Generalized estimating equations ( GEE ) estimated the odds of response for people receiving the STEPS program in comparison to the odds of response in the controls ( odds ratio , OR ) . Results : Twenty-six persons were r and omized to three groups : during rehabilitation , after rehabilitation , and usual care . For the fatigue measures the OR for STEPS offered at any time using an intention-to-treat approach was 3.68 ( 95%CI : 1.05 - 12.88 ) ; for the physical function measures , the OR was 1.40 ( 95%CI : 0.41- 4.79 ) and 2.36 ( 95%CI : 0.66 - 8.51 ) for the well-being measures . Conclusion : Fifty percent of eligible people were able to participate . This small trial suggests that a personalized exercise program reduces fatigue and that 100 people are needed in a full strength 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 ?