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 ?
A couple-based intervention for patients and caregivers facing end-stage cancer: outcomes of a randomized controlled trial.
BACKGROUND We evaluated the effect of Emotionally Focused Therapy ( EFT ) [ intervention ( INT ) ] , modified for the advanced cancer population versus st and ard care [ control ( CTL ) ] , on marital functioning and psychosocial outcomes among distressed couples .  EFT examines the ways couples process patterns of interaction , facilitating change . METHODS Forty-two patients with metastatic cancer and their caregivers were assigned r and omly to receive eight sessions of EFT delivered by one EFT-trained psychologist or st and ard care provided by multidisciplinary clinicians . Partners completed measures of marital functioning , depression , hopelessness , empathic caregiving ( patient ) , and caregiver burden ( caregiver ) before r and omization at baseline ( T0 ) , post-intervention ( T1 ) , and 3-month post-intervention ( T2 ) . Data were analyzed using three-way analyses of covariance ; main effects were treatment , patient status , and sex . Multilevel modeling was also employed . RESULTS At T1 , INT group led to significant improvement in marital functioning ( p ≤ 0.0001 ) and patients ' experience of caregiver empathic care ( p = 0.02 ) versus CTL group . Effect sizes for these differences were in the large range ( d = 1.00 ) . In both groups , patients showed a marginally higher mean score for marital functioning compared with caregivers [ INT : M = 56.3 , st and ard deviation ( SD ) = 4.6 vs M = 54.3 , SD = 4.5 ; CTL group : M = 43.4 , SD = 10.3 vs M = 42.4 , SD = 6.8 , respectively ] . At T2 , results were maintained . CONCLUSIONS The effectiveness of and adherence to the EFT couple intervention for patients facing advanced cancer were demonstrated in this study . Larger r and omized control trials are needed to confirm these findings . Qualitative studies may help to further underst and the mechanism by which such an intervention may act
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 ?