Feasibility of FitSurvivor: A technology‐enhanced group‐based fitness intervention for adolescent and young adult survivors of childhood cancer

Abstract

Background This study evaluated the feasibility of a technology‐enhanced group‐based fitness intervention for adolescent and young adult (AYA) survivors of childhood cancer. Procedure AYA survivors ages 13‐25 years were randomized to the intervention (eight in‐person group sessions with mobile app and FitBit followed by 4 weeks of app and FitBit only) or waitlist control. Assessments were at 0, 2, 3, 6, and 9 months. Feasibility was evaluated by enrollment, retention, attendance, app engagement, and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included physical activity, muscular strength/endurance, cardiorespiratory fitness, health‐related quality of life, and fatigue. Results A total of 354 survivors were mailed participation letters; 68 (19%) were screened, of which 56 were eligible and 49 enrolled (88% of those screened eligible, 14% of total potentially eligible). Forty‐nine survivors (Mage = 18.5 years, 49% female) completed baseline assessments and were randomized (25 intervention, 24 waitlist). Thirty‐seven (76%) completed the postintervention assessment and 32 (65%) completed the final assessment. On average, participants attended 5.7 of eight sessions (range 1‐8). Overall intervention satisfaction was high (M = 4.3, SD = 0.58 on 1‐5 scale). Satisfaction with the companion app was moderately high (M = 3.4, SD = 0.97). The intervention group demonstrated significantly greater improvement in lower body muscle strength compared to the waitlist postintervention, and small but not statistically significant changes in other secondary measures. Conclusions A group‐based intervention with a mobile app and fitness tracker was acceptable but has limited reach due to geographical barriers and competing demands experienced by AYA survivors.

A Scoping Review to Assess Adherence to and Clinical Outcomes of Wearable Devices in the Cancer Population

“…In terms of measurement tools, the studies included in this scoping review used subjective self-reported questionnaires, WDs, and mobile applications to track the health status of the participants. Only four studies conducted personal interviews to analyze participants’ adherence to WDs and their study experiences [ 21 , 33 , 40 , 57 ]. Furthermore, 10 studies evaluated the correlation between the outcomes of WDs and questionnaires to validate the effectiveness of using WDs in patients with cancer [ 27 , 31 , 34 , 36 , 37 , 48 , 49 , 52 , 54 , 56 ].…”

“…The studies included in this review article employed different interventional approaches to improve the clinical outcomes of the participants. Most of the studies used a mobile application to provide the intervention [ 22 , 34 , 35 , 39 , 40 , 46 , 53 , 54 , 57 ]. Of the 38 studies, 3 provided the intervention by sending text messages [ 22 , 45 , 57 ], and 4 conducted a general group session or included a virtual support group [ 39 , 41 , 44 ].…”

“…The average adherence percentage was calculated for each segment. The intervention-based segments included studies with weeks 1 [ 48 , 49 ], 2 [ 27 , 55 ], 3 [ 50 , 52 , 57 ], 4 [ 36 , 37 , 53 ], 7 [ 28 ], 8 [ 32 , 33 , 34 ], 10 [ 24 , 30 , 41 ], 12 [ 20 , 21 , 23 , 25 , 26 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 54 , 56 ], 17 [ 29 ], 24 [ 22 , 31 ] and 43 [ 35 ]. In the graph, (1.84) indicates the studies grouped in this segment that had a one-week intervention with an average adherence of 84%.…”

“…In the graph, (1.84) indicates the studies grouped in this segment that had a one-week intervention with an average adherence of 84%. According to our analysis, 16 out of 38 studies used a 12-week intervention period with an average adherence of 86% ( Figure 2 ) [ 20 , 21 , 23 , 25 , 26 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 54 , 56 ]. The follow-up periods in the reported studies were calculated by subtracting the intervention duration from the total study duration.…”

Wearable activity trackers for promoting physical activity: A systematic meta-analytic review

“…About half trials recruited participants with a medical condition (n = 21, 49%), including diabetes [38,39], cardiovascular disease [40,41], peripheral artery disease [42], chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [43,44], early knee osteoarthritis [45,46], rheumatoid arthritis [47], systemic lupus erythematosus [47], and cancer [25,32,[48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55]. The other half (n = 22, 51%) did not restrict participants according to medical conditions.…”