Dataset Information

A pilot feasibility study of Exercising Together© during radiation therapy for prostate cancer: a dyadic approach for patients and spouses.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Prostate cancer can negatively impact the health of patients and their spouse, particularly early on in the cancer trajectory.

Purpose

To determine the feasibility and acceptability of dyadic exercises during radiation therapy and preliminary efficacy on physical, mental, and relational outcomes for men and their spouses. Exercising Together©, originally designed as a 6-month dyadic resistance training program for couples post-treatment, was adapted for the radiation setting.

Methods

We conducted a single-group pilot feasibility study of Exercising Together© in men scheduled for radiation therapy for prostate cancer and their spouse. Couples attended supervised exercise sessions thrice weekly throughout radiation treatment and were followed up 8 weeks later. Primary outcomes were feasibility and acceptability with secondary outcomes of changes in physical (physical functioning (short physical performance battery (sPPB)), gait speed (m/s), functional capacity (400-m walk (min), physical activity (min/week)), mental (depressive symptoms (CES-D), and anxiety (SCL-90 ANX)), and relationship (Dyadic Coping, Role Overload, and Physical Intimacy Behavior Scales) health outcomes for each partner. Participants completed an evaluation post-intervention.

Results

Ten couples enrolled and 8 completed the intervention, attending 83% of scheduled sessions. Couple satisfaction with the intervention was high (patients: mean difference (MD) = 9.4 ± 1.9 and spouses: MD = 10.0 ± 0.0, on a 1-10 scale). At post-intervention, gait speed (MD = 0.1; 95%CI: 0.1, 0.2; p = 0.003; d = 0.94) and functional capacity (MD = -0.6; 95%CI: -0.9, 0.3; p = 0.002; d = -0.42) improved in patients and sPPB in spouses (MD = 1.3; 95%CI: 0.3, 2.2; p = 0.02; d = 0.71). Total physical activity increased non-significantly for patients and significantly for spouses at post-intervention and decreased at follow-up (MD = 179.6; 95%CI: 55.4, 303.7; p = 0.01; d = 1.35 and MD = -139.9; 95%CI: -266.5, 13.3; p = 0.03; d=1.06). Among patients, anxiety and active engagement significantly improved post-intervention (MD = -2.3; 95%CI: -3.8, 0.7; p = 0.01; d = -0.43 and MD = 2.5; 95%CI: 0.7, 4.3; p = 0.01; d = 0.98, respectively). There were modest effects on other physical, mental, and relationship health domains in patients and spouses.

Conclusion

A modified version of Exercising Together© is a feasible and acceptable program during radiation therapy for prostate cancer and shows preliminary evidence for improvements on physical, mental, and relational health in both patient and spouse. A larger, fully powered randomized controlled trial is warranted and could help shift the landscape toward dyadically targeted interventions.

Trial registration

This study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on February 18th, 2018 ( NCT03418025 ).

SUBMITTER: Winters-Stone KM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8653603 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMost cancer survivors are married, and cancer strains the physical and mental health of each partner and their intimate relationship. We created a partnered strength training program, Exercising Together©, where the survivor and his/her partner exercise as a team in order to improve physical and mental health of both members of the couple as well as the quality of their relationship. We have not yet determined if Exercising Together© is similarly effective in couples coping with different types of cancer nor if training as a team has unique and added benefits over those derived from supervised group training and/or shared behavior change. The purpose of this study is to determine the unique benefits of Exercising Together© on physical, mental, and relational health in couples coping with breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer.MethodsSurvivors of prostate, breast and colorectal cancer (N = 294, 98 per cancer site) and their intimate, co-residing partners are recruited to participate in a single-blind, parallel group, randomized trial comparing three exercise groups that train twice per week for 6 months. Couples are randomized to one of three groups: (1) Exercising Together© where partners train as a team in a supervised group setting; (2) separate supervised group exercise classes for survivors or partners, respectively; (3) unsupervised home exercise program provided to each partner. The primary outcome is relationship quality (dyadic coping by the Dyadic Coping scale, emotional intimacy by the Dyadic Adjustment Scale, physical intimacy by the Physical Intimacy Behavior Scale, and symptom incongruence). Secondary outcomes are physical health (% body fat by DXA, serum fasting lipids (triglycerides, HDL, and LDL cholesterol), insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), resting blood pressure, C-reactive protein, TNF alpha, and physical functioning by the short Physical Performance Battery and SF-36) and mental health (depressive symptoms, anxiety, fear of recurrence) of each partner. Outcomes are collected at baseline, mid (3 months), post-intervention (6 months), and follow-up (12 months).DiscussionExercising Together© could shift the paradigm of survivorship care toward novel couple-based approaches that could optimize outcomes for each partner because their health is interdependent on each other and their relationship.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03630354 . Registered August 14, 2018.

Project description:BackgroundThere are more than 1 million hospital admissions and 3 million emergency visits for heart failure in the USA annually. Although spouse/partners make substantial contributions to the management of heart failure and experience poor health and high levels of care strain, they are rarely the focus of heart failure interventions. This protocol describes a pilot randomized controlled trial that tests the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary change in outcomes of a seven-session couple-based intervention called Taking Care of Us© (TCU). The TCU© intervention is grounded in the theory of dyadic illness management and was developed to promote collaborative illness management and better physical and mental health of adults with heart failure and their partners.MethodsA two-arm randomized controlled trial will be conducted. Eligible adults with heart failure and their co-residing spouse/partner will be recruited from a clinical site in the USA and community/social media outreach and randomized to either the TCU© intervention or to a control condition (SUPPORT©) that offers education around heart failure management. The target sample is 60 couples (30 per arm). TCU© couples will receive seven sessions over 2 months via Zoom; SUPPORT© couples will receive three sessions over 2 months via Zoom. All participants will complete self-report measures at baseline (T1), post-treatment (T2), and 3 months post-treatment (T3). Acceptability and feasibility of the intervention will be examined using both closed-ended and open-ended questions as well as enrollment, retention, completion, and satisfaction metrics. Preliminary exploration of change in outcomes of TCU© on dyadic health, dyadic appraisal, and collaborative management will also be conducted.DiscussionTheoretically driven, evidence-based dyadic interventions are needed to optimize the health of both members of the couple living with heart failure. Results from this study will provide important information about recruitment and retention and benefits and drawbacks of the TCU© program to directly inform any needed refinements of the program and decision to move to a main trial.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04737759) registered on 27 January 2021.

Project description:BackgroundLevels of physical activity (PA) in UK children are much lower than recommended and novel approaches to its promotion are needed. The Children, Parents and Pets Exercising Together (CPET) study is the first exploratory randomised controlled trial (RCT) to develop and evaluate an intervention aimed at dog-based PA promotion in families. CPET aimed to assess the feasibility, acceptability and potential efficacy of a theory-driven, family-based, dog walking intervention for 9-11 year olds.MethodsTwenty-eight families were allocated randomly to either receive a 10-week dog based PA intervention or to a control group. Families in the intervention group were motivated and supported to increase the frequency, intensity and duration of dog walking using a number of behaviour change techniques. Parents in the intervention group were asked to complete a short study exit questionnaire. In addition, focus groups with parents and children in the intervention group, and with key stakeholders were undertaken. The primary outcome measure was 10 week change in total volume of PA using the mean accelerometer count per minute (cpm). Intervention and control groups were compared using analysis of covariance. Analysis was performed on an intention to treat basis.ResultsTwenty five families were retained at follow up (89%) and 97% of all outcome data were collected at baseline and follow up. Thirteen of 14 (93%) intervention group parents available at follow up completed the study exit questionnaire and noted that study outcome measures were acceptable. There was a mean difference in child total volume of PA of 27 cpm (95% CI -70, 123) and -3 cpm (95% CI -60, 54) for intervention and control group children, respectively. This was not statistically significant. Approximately 21% of dog walking time for parents and 39% of dog walking time for children was moderate-vigorous PA.ConclusionsThe acceptability of the CPET intervention and outcome measures was high. Using pet dogs as the agent of lifestyle change in PA interventions in children and their parents is both feasible and acceptable, but did not result in a significant increase in child PA in this exploratory trial.Trial registrationISRCTN85939423.