Feasibility and Acceptability of an Active Video Game-Based Physical Activity Support Group (Pink Warrior) for Survivors of Breast Cancer: Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial.
breast cancer
group intervention
mobile phone
motivation
physical activity
physical function
pilot study
survivors of cancer
video games
Journal
JMIR cancer
ISSN: 2369-1999
Titre abrégé: JMIR Cancer
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101666844
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 Aug 2022
22 Aug 2022
Historique:
received:
29
01
2022
accepted:
04
07
2022
revised:
01
07
2022
entrez:
22
8
2022
pubmed:
23
8
2022
medline:
23
8
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Survivors of breast cancer with functional limitations have a 40% higher mortality rate than those without. Despite the known benefits of physical activity (PA), <40% of survivors of breast cancer meet the recommendations for PA. The combination of active video games (AVGs) and group-based PA counseling may hold potential for motivating PA adoption and improving physical function. However, this method has not been widely studied in survivors of breast cancer. We aimed to determine the feasibility and acceptability of a group AVG-based multicomponent PA intervention and estimate its effect size and variability on PA and physical function in female survivors of breast cancer in a clinic setting. Female survivors of breast cancer (N=60) were recruited through the clinic and randomly assigned to the intervention group (12 weekly sessions) or the control group (existing support group). The intervention group received game-based pedometers and participated in weekly group AVG sessions, PA behavioral coaching, and survivorship navigation discussions. A participant manual with weekly reflection worksheets was provided to reinforce the coaching lessons and promote self-led PA. The control group received conventional pedometers and participated in an existing breast cancer support group. Feasibility was assessed by enrollment rate (≥50%), retention rate (≥80%), group attendance rate (75% attending ≥9 sessions [intervention group]), and the number of technological issues and adverse events. Acceptability was measured by participants' attitudes (from strongly disagree=1 to strongly agree=5) toward the use of AVGs and the overall program. The outcomes included PA (accelerometers) and physical function (Short Physical Performance Battery and gait speed). Analysis of covariance was used to determine differences in PA and physical function between the groups. The Cohen d and its 95% CI determined the effect size and variability, respectively. All the analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. Participants were an average of 57.4 (SD 10.5) years old, 70% (42/60) White, and 58% (35/60) off treatment. The enrollment rate was 55.9% (66/118). Despite substantial long-term hurricane-related disruptions, we achieved an 80% (48/60) retention. The intervention group's attendance rate was 78% (14/18), whereas the control group's attendance rate was 53% (9/17). Of the 26 game-based pedometers, 3 (12%) were damaged or lost. No study-related adverse events occurred. Acceptability items were highly rated. Steps (β=1621.64; P=.01; d=0.72), Short Physical Performance Battery (β=.47; P=.01; d=0.25), and gait speed (β=.12; P=.004; d=0.48) had a significant intervention effect. The intervention was feasible and acceptable in this population despite the occurrence of a natural disaster. Pilot results indicate that group AVG sessions, PA coaching, and survivorship navigation produced moderate effects on PA and physical functioning. AVGs with PA counseling can potentially be used in existing breast cancer support groups to encourage PA and improve physical function. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02750241; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02750241.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Survivors of breast cancer with functional limitations have a 40% higher mortality rate than those without. Despite the known benefits of physical activity (PA), <40% of survivors of breast cancer meet the recommendations for PA. The combination of active video games (AVGs) and group-based PA counseling may hold potential for motivating PA adoption and improving physical function. However, this method has not been widely studied in survivors of breast cancer.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to determine the feasibility and acceptability of a group AVG-based multicomponent PA intervention and estimate its effect size and variability on PA and physical function in female survivors of breast cancer in a clinic setting.
METHODS
METHODS
Female survivors of breast cancer (N=60) were recruited through the clinic and randomly assigned to the intervention group (12 weekly sessions) or the control group (existing support group). The intervention group received game-based pedometers and participated in weekly group AVG sessions, PA behavioral coaching, and survivorship navigation discussions. A participant manual with weekly reflection worksheets was provided to reinforce the coaching lessons and promote self-led PA. The control group received conventional pedometers and participated in an existing breast cancer support group. Feasibility was assessed by enrollment rate (≥50%), retention rate (≥80%), group attendance rate (75% attending ≥9 sessions [intervention group]), and the number of technological issues and adverse events. Acceptability was measured by participants' attitudes (from strongly disagree=1 to strongly agree=5) toward the use of AVGs and the overall program. The outcomes included PA (accelerometers) and physical function (Short Physical Performance Battery and gait speed). Analysis of covariance was used to determine differences in PA and physical function between the groups. The Cohen d and its 95% CI determined the effect size and variability, respectively. All the analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Participants were an average of 57.4 (SD 10.5) years old, 70% (42/60) White, and 58% (35/60) off treatment. The enrollment rate was 55.9% (66/118). Despite substantial long-term hurricane-related disruptions, we achieved an 80% (48/60) retention. The intervention group's attendance rate was 78% (14/18), whereas the control group's attendance rate was 53% (9/17). Of the 26 game-based pedometers, 3 (12%) were damaged or lost. No study-related adverse events occurred. Acceptability items were highly rated. Steps (β=1621.64; P=.01; d=0.72), Short Physical Performance Battery (β=.47; P=.01; d=0.25), and gait speed (β=.12; P=.004; d=0.48) had a significant intervention effect.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The intervention was feasible and acceptable in this population despite the occurrence of a natural disaster. Pilot results indicate that group AVG sessions, PA coaching, and survivorship navigation produced moderate effects on PA and physical functioning. AVGs with PA counseling can potentially be used in existing breast cancer support groups to encourage PA and improve physical function.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02750241; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02750241.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35994321
pii: v8i3e36889
doi: 10.2196/36889
pmc: PMC9446134
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02750241']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e36889Informations de copyright
©Maria C Swartz, Zakkoyya H Lewis, Rachel R Deer, Anna L Stahl, Michael D Swartz, Ursela Christopherson, Karen Basen-Engquist, Stephanie J Wells, H Colleen Silva, Elizabeth J Lyons. Originally published in JMIR Cancer (https://cancer.jmir.org), 22.08.2022.
Références
Am J Med. 2007 Apr;120(4):337-42
pubmed: 17398228
Cancer. 2022 Jan 15;128(2):353-363
pubmed: 34554567
J Med Internet Res. 2013 May 07;15(5):e81
pubmed: 23651701
Psychol Aging. 2012 Sep;27(3):589-600
pubmed: 22122605
Cardiopulm Phys Ther J. 2008 Mar;19(1):17-22
pubmed: 20467494
Patient Educ Couns. 2006 Dec;64(1-3):225-34
pubmed: 16843633
J Geriatr Oncol. 2019 Mar;10(2):311-316
pubmed: 30344000
J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2011 Aug;33(4):506-26
pubmed: 21808077
J Eval Clin Pract. 2014 Aug;20(4):295-300
pubmed: 24798823
J Geriatr Oncol. 2016 Mar;7(2):71-80
pubmed: 26916611
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2018 Sep 26;19(9):2591-2597
pubmed: 30256065
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2008 Nov 06;5:56
pubmed: 18990237
JMIR Form Res. 2020 May 4;4(5):e15083
pubmed: 32364506
Ann Behav Med. 2018 May 18;52(6):501-512
pubmed: 27401001
Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2011 Nov;14(11):681-8
pubmed: 21668370
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007 May;16(5):866-72
pubmed: 17507607
J Med Internet Res. 2013 Jun 04;15(6):e104
pubmed: 23732514
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017 Aug 14;14(1):106
pubmed: 28807041
J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2018;31(3):447-452
pubmed: 28946542
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2007 Jan;16(1):55-66
pubmed: 17227354
NPJ Breast Cancer. 2017 Dec 12;3:50
pubmed: 29238750
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Dec;99(12):2621-2636
pubmed: 29730319
Health Educ Res. 2003 Jun;18(3):304-17
pubmed: 12828232
Diabetes Spectr. 2015 Jan;28(1):45-54
pubmed: 25717278
Psychol Health. 2011 Nov;26(11):1479-98
pubmed: 21678185
Support Care Cancer. 2015 Aug;23(8):2407-16
pubmed: 25605568
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 Oct 6;102(19):1468-77
pubmed: 20861456
BMJ. 2016 Oct 24;355:i5239
pubmed: 27777223
BMC Cancer. 2016 Mar 09;16:202
pubmed: 26960972
Qual Health Res. 2009 Jul;19(7):894-906
pubmed: 19448032
BMC Cancer. 2018 Nov 21;18(1):1151
pubmed: 30463615
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013 Jun;22(6):1153-61
pubmed: 23576689
J Clin Oncol. 2008 May 1;26(13):2198-204
pubmed: 18445845
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020 Jun 20;17(1):78
pubmed: 32563261
Cancer Pract. 1999 Nov-Dec;7(6):297-301
pubmed: 10732527
Games Health J. 2020 Aug;9(4):297-303
pubmed: 32083500
CA Cancer J Clin. 2019 Nov;69(6):468-484
pubmed: 31617590
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014 Jul;46(7):1375-83
pubmed: 24389524
Oncol Nurs Forum. 2015 Jan;42(1):E33-53
pubmed: 25542333
Support Care Cancer. 2009 Jan;17(1):61-7
pubmed: 18478275
BMC Public Health. 2014 Nov 24;14:1210
pubmed: 25421941
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2018 Oct;16(10):1163-1165
pubmed: 30323085
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Aug;98(8):1652-1665
pubmed: 28427925
Health Psychol. 2015 Dec;34S:1229-39
pubmed: 26651464
Health Promot Int. 2004 Dec;19(4):463-70
pubmed: 15522947
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2014 May;23(5):687-99
pubmed: 24599577
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2017 Mar 06;5(3):e28
pubmed: 28264796
Games Health J. 2014 Dec;3(6):351-65
pubmed: 26192642
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012 Jun 22;9:78
pubmed: 22726453
Am Psychol. 2000 Jan;55(1):68-78
pubmed: 11392867
J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2008 Feb;30(1):23-38
pubmed: 18369241
Health Psychol. 2013 Aug;32(8):829-38
pubmed: 23477577
Clin Psychol Sci. 2014 Jan 1;2(1):22-34
pubmed: 25821658
J Aging Phys Act. 2014 Jul;22(3):364-71
pubmed: 23945726
Health Psychol Rev. 2016 Sep;10(3):297-312
pubmed: 26262912
Front Psychol. 2013 Nov 26;4:863
pubmed: 24324449
J Nutr Health Aging. 2019;23(9):771-787
pubmed: 31641726
Health Psychol. 2009 Nov;28(6):690-701
pubmed: 19916637
Support Care Cancer. 2020 Sep;28(9):4295-4303
pubmed: 31907649
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020 Oct 9;17(1):129
pubmed: 33036635
Circulation. 2011 May 31;123(21):2507-16
pubmed: 21518980
Sports Med Open. 2018 Sep 3;4(1):42
pubmed: 30178072
Psychooncology. 2018 Mar;27(3):713-724
pubmed: 29247584