2021
DOI: 10.1007/s11764-021-01032-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluating implementation and pragmatism of cancer-specific exercise programs: a scoping review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
10
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION (STANDARDS 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, AND 10) The Fit Cancer program was developed based on established clinical guidelines, PA behavior change theory, and a scoping review of existing cancer CSEP (6). Future programs may also consider engaging clinical stakeholders and using formative research to foster buy-in from medical and/or rehabilitation professionals.…”
Section: Program Evaluation (Standard 11)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION (STANDARDS 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, AND 10) The Fit Cancer program was developed based on established clinical guidelines, PA behavior change theory, and a scoping review of existing cancer CSEP (6). Future programs may also consider engaging clinical stakeholders and using formative research to foster buy-in from medical and/or rehabilitation professionals.…”
Section: Program Evaluation (Standard 11)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This was an unanticipated finding that was likely due to context-specific differences in implementation processes. In Edmonton, the research team’s delivery of the community-based program was more consistent with an explanatory research approach [ 23 ]. Research staff were actively involved in the program, including through oversight of data collection, monitoring of participant adherence, and provision of onsite support to the community exercise specialist delivering the intervention, features consistent with prior YMCA implementation approaches [ 43 , 44 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Criticisms of the focus on community-based initiatives include a lack of concordance with patients’ preferences for home-based interventions, as well as poor attendance and high dropout rates reported from community programs [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. Thus, further study is needed to provide contextually relevant and timely information on factors that can enhance or impede implementation success [ 22 , 23 ]. Assessing the feasibility of an implementation strategy offers the opportunity to evaluate both the outcomes and processes involved and refine the intervention and its delivery format prior to program spread and scale [ 22 , 24 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some institutions, such as the Canadian Cancer Society [ 17 ] and the Australian public hospitals [ 18 ] have developed real-world settings. Still, current research is limited to cancer survivors or people diagnosed with cancer [ 19 , 20 ]. The aim of this article was (a) to describe the process behind a free, not-for-profit community-based therapeutic exercise program (TEP) for MBC patients in the clinical setting and (b) to determine the recruitment, compliance and improvement in outcomes after its completion.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%