Background Cancer survivors are at increased risk for second malignancies, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and functional decline. Evidence suggests that a healthful diet and physical activity may reduce the risk of chronic disease and improve health in this population. Methods We conducted a feasibility study to evaluate a vegetable gardening intervention that paired 12 adult and child cancer survivors with Master Gardeners to explore effects on fruit and vegetable intake, physical activity, quality-of-life, and physical function. Throughout the year-long study period, the survivor-Master Gardener dyads worked together to plan/plant 3 gardens, harvest/rotate plantings, and troubleshoot/correct problems. Data on diet, physical activity, and quality-of-life were collected via surveys; anthropometrics and physical function were objectively measured. Acceptability of the intervention was assessed with a structured debriefing survey. Results The gardening intervention was feasible (robust enrollment; minimal attrition) and well-received by cancer survivors and Master Gardeners. Improvement in 3 of 4 objective measures of strength, agility, and endurance was observed in 90% of survivors, with the following change scores (median [interquartile range]) noted between baseline and 1-year follow-up: hand grip test (+4.8 [3.0, 6.7] kg), 8 foot Get-Up-and-Go (−1.0 [−1.8, −0.2] seconds), 30-second chair stand (+3.0 [−1.0, 5.0] stands), and 6-minute walk (+38 [20, 160] feet). Increases of ≥1 fruit and vegetable serving/ day and ≥30 minutes/week of physical activity were observed in 40% and 60%, respectively. Conclusion These preliminary results support the feasibility and acceptability of a mentored gardening intervention and suggest that it may offer a novel and promising strategy to improve fruit and vegetable consumption, physical activity, and physical function in cancer survivors. A larger randomized controlled trial is needed to confirm our results.

No abstract

Background Cancer survivors suffer from long-term adverse effects that reduce health-related quality of life (QOL) and physical functioning, creating an urgent need to develop effective, durable, and disseminable interventions. Harvest for Health, a home-based vegetable gardening intervention, holds promise for these domains. Methods This report describes the methods and recruitment experiences from two randomized controlled feasibility trials that employ a waitlist-controlled design. Delivered in partnership with Cooperative Extension Master Gardeners, this intervention provides one-on-one mentorship of cancer survivors in planning and maintaining three seasonal vegetable gardens over 12 months. The primary aim is to determine intervention feasibility and acceptability; secondary aims are to explore effects on objective and subjective measures of diet, physical activity and function, and QOL and examine participant factors associated with potential effects. One trial is conducted exclusively among 82 female breast cancer survivors residing in the Birmingham, AL metropolitan area (BBCS); another broadly throughout Alabama among 46 older cancer survivors aged ≥60 (ASCS). Results Response rates were 32.6% (BBCS) and 52.3% (ASCS). Both trials exceeded 80% of their accrual target. Leading reasons for ineligibility were removal of >10 lymph nodes (lymphedema risk factor), lack of physician approval, and unwillingness to be randomized to the waitlist. Conclusion To date, recruitment and implementation of Harvest for Health appears feasible. Discussion Although both studies encountered recruitment challenges, lessons learned can inform future larger-scale studies. Vegetable gardening interventions are of interest to cancer survivors and may provide opportunities to gain life skills leading to improvements in overall health and QOL.

We look at differences between the experience of virtual environments and physical reality, and consider making the technical limitations which cause these differences 'visible', aiming to provide resources to enhance communication between users. Three causes of such discrepancies are considered to illustrate this idea: field-ofview; haptic feedback; and network delays. For each, we examine ways of revealing the limitations of the virtual world as resources to better understand the intricacies of system and co-user behaviour. These examples introduce a broader discussion of design issues involved in producing interfaces for day-to-day collaboration through virtual environments. Issues include: the application and activity undertaken through the virtual world; the ability to focus on the business at hand rather than the system in use; and extent of users' familiarity with application and system.