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

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerri M. Winters-Stone ◽  
Karen S. Lyons ◽  
Tomasz M. Beer ◽  
Meghan B. Skiba ◽  
Arthur Hung

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).

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerri Winters-Stone ◽  
Karen Lyons ◽  
Tomasz M. Beer ◽  
Meghan B. Skiba ◽  
Arthur Hung

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 exercise 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/sec), functional capacity (400-meter 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: x̄=9.4±1.9 and spouses: x̄=10.0±0.0, on a 1-10 scale). At post-intervention, gait speed (x̄=0.1; 95%CI: 0.1, 0.2; p=0.003; d=0.94) and functional capacity (x̄=-0.6; 95%CI: -0.9, 0.3; p=0.002; d=-0.42) improved in patients and SPPB in spouses (x̄=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 (x̄=179.6; 95%CI: 55.4, 303.7; p=0.01; d=1.35 and x̄=-139.9; 95%CI: -266.5,13.3; p=0.03; d=1.06). Among patients, anxiety and active engagement significantly improved post-intervention (x̄=-2.3; 95%CI: -3.8, 0.7; p=0.01; d=-0.43 and x̄=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; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03418025).


2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. 901
Author(s):  
Mary E. Medysky ◽  
Jessica C. Sitemba ◽  
Kimi Daniel ◽  
Arthur Hung ◽  
Kerri M. Winters-Stone

Oncology ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 79 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 382-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Citrin ◽  
Kevin Camphausen ◽  
Bradford J. Wood ◽  
Martha Quezado ◽  
John Denobile ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 120 ◽  
pp. S51
Author(s):  
Tim Craig ◽  
Cynthia Menard ◽  
Chung Peter ◽  
Padraig Warde ◽  
Andrew McPartlin ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmen D Samuel-Hodge ◽  
Ziya Gizlice ◽  
Sallie D Allgood ◽  
Audrina J Bunton ◽  
Amber Erskine ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Community Health Workers (CHW) are recommended for delivery of interventions to prevent cardiovascular disease, but there is insufficient evidence to guide implementation of CHW interventions in rural, medically underserved areas.Methods Using a hybrid implementation-effectiveness design, we evaluated the implementation and effectiveness of an adapted, evidence-based cardiovascular disease risk reduction intervention among rural high-risk adults. CHWs at a community health center and local health department recruited, enrolled and counseled participants during 4 monthly home visits and 3 brief phone contacts. Participant data collection included pre- and post-intervention measurements of blood pressure, weight, and dietary and physical activity behaviors. We evaluated implementation with measures of intervention reach and delivery fidelity. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics and paired t-tests.Results Study participants (n=105) had a mean age of 62 years and included 88% Non-Hispanic Blacks and 82% females. Recruitment strategies resulted in the enrollment of 38% of interested and eligible participants who received 80% of the planned intervention visits and phone contacts. Mean differences in pre-/post-intervention measures showed significant mean reductions in blood pressure (-5.4 mm Hg systolic, p=.006; -2.3 mm Hg diastolic, p=.04) and body weight (-3.8 lb., p=.02). Self-reported dietary and physical activity behaviors also improved significantly.Conclusion This feasibility study demonstrated preliminary implementation and program effectiveness of a CHW-delivered intervention to reduce cardiovascular disease risk factors. Additionally, it identified areas for future refinements to strategies that strengthen community-clinical linkages with an integrated role of CHWs in rural health care delivery. If results from this feasibility study can be enhanced in a larger sample, there would be significant potential to positively impact the excess burden of chronic diseases that adversely impact rural, low-income, and medically underserved populations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document