Short-term efficacy of a computer-tailored physical activity intervention for prostate and colorectal cancer patients and survivors: a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

BackgroundPhysical activity (PA) is beneficial in improving negative physical and psychological effects of cancer and cancer treatment, but adherence to PA guidelines is low. Computer-tailored PA interventions can reach large populations with little resources. They match with patients’ preference for home-based, unsupervised PA programs and are thus promising for the growing population of cancer survivors. The current study assessed the efficacy of a computer-tailored PA intervention in (four subgroups of) prostate and colorectal cancer survivors.MethodsProstate and colorectal cancer patients and survivors were randomized to the OncoActive intervention group (N = 249), or a usual-care waiting-list control group (N = 229). OncoActive participants received a pedometer and computer-tailored PA advice, both Web-based via an interactive website and with printed materials. Minutes moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) and days ≥30 min PA were assessed with an accelerometer (ActiGraph) at baseline and 6 months. Further, questionnaires were used to assess self-reported PA, fatigue, distress, and quality of life at baseline, 3 and 6 months. Differences between both groups were assessed using linear regression analyses (complete cases and intention-to-treat). In addition, efficacy in relation to age, gender, education, type of cancer, and time since treatment was examined.ResultsThree months after baseline OncoActive participants significantly increased their self-reported PA (PA days: d = 0.46; MVPA: d = 0.23). Physical functioning (d = 0.23) and fatigue (d = − 0.21) also improved significantly after three months. Six months after baseline, self-reported PA (PA days: d = 0.51; MVPA: d = 0.37) and ActiGraph MVPA (d = 0.27) increased significantly, and ActiGraph days (d = 0.16) increased borderline significantly (p = .05; d = 0.16). Furthermore, OncoActive participants reported significantly improvements in physical functioning (d = 0.14), fatigue (d = − 0.23) and depression (d = − 0.32). Similar results were found for intention-to-treat analyses. Higher increases in PA were found for colorectal cancer participants at 3 months, and for medium and highly educated participants’ PA at 6 months. Health outcomes at 6 months were more prominent in colorectal cancer participants and in women.ConclusionsThe OncoActive intervention was effective at increasing PA in prostate and colorectal cancer patients and survivors. Health-related effects were especially apparent in colorectal cancer participants. The intervention provides opportunities to accelerate cancer recovery. Long-term follow-up should examine further sustainability of these effects.Trial registrationThe study was registered in the Dutch Trial Register (NTR4296) on October 17 2018.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12966-018-0734-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effectiveness of e‐health based self‐management to improve cancer‐related fatigue, self‐efficacy and quality of life in cancer patients: Systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…The trials were published between 2005–2018. Trials were undertaken in the USA (Bantum et al, ; Owen et al, ; Smith et al, ; Somers et al, ; Syrjala et al, ), Netherlands (Admiraal et al, ; van der Berg et al, ; Boele et al, ; Golsteijn et al, ; Willems et al, ), UK (Foster et al, ), Canada (Vallerand et al, ), China (Zhang et al, ; Zhu et al, ), and South Korea (Lee et al, ).…”

“…Participants in four trials were patients with any cancer (Foster et al, ; Bantum et al, ; Somers et al, ; Willems et al, ). The other eleven trials focused on specific cancers: breast cancer (Admiraal et al, ; van den Berg et al, ; Lee et al, ; Owen et al, ; Smith et al, ; Zhu et al, ), glioma (Boele et al, ), haematological cancer (Syrjala et al, ; Vallerand et al, ), rectal cancer (Zhang et al, ), and both colorectal cancer and prostate cancer (Golsteijn et al, ). Nine trials reported participants who completed primary treatment (Admiraal et al, ; van der Berg et al, ; Foster et al, ; Lee et al, ; Bantum et al, ; Somers et al, ; Syrjala et al, ; Willems et al, ; Zhang et al, ); the time since treatment completion was 4 weeks to 18 years.…”

“…Nine trials reported participants who completed primary treatment (Admiraal et al, ; van der Berg et al, ; Foster et al, ; Lee et al, ; Bantum et al, ; Somers et al, ; Syrjala et al, ; Willems et al, ; Zhang et al, ); the time since treatment completion was 4 weeks to 18 years. One trial included participants undergoing treatment (Zhu et al, ), while another one included both undergoing treatment and primary treatment completed (Golsteijn et al, ). Other four trials failed to report the duration since primary treatment completed or whether undergoing treatment (Boele et al, ; Owen et al, ; Smith et al, ; Vallerand et al, ).…”

“…Interventions in trials focused on behaviour change (Golsteijn et al, ; Lee et al, ; Bantum et al, ; Vallerand et al, ), medical management (Foster et al, ; Smith et al, ; Somers et al, ; Zhang et al, ; Zhu et al, ), and psychological management (Admiraal et al, ; van der Berg et al, ; Boele et al, ; Owen et al, ; Syrjala et al, ) while one trial focused on both behaviour and psychological management (Willems et al, ). Most studies were web‐based (Admiraal et al, ; van der Berg et al, ; Boele et al, ; Foster et al, ; Golsteijn et al, ; Lee et al, ; Bantum et al, ; Owen et al, ; Smith et al, ; Somers et al, ; Syrjala et al, ; Willems et al, ) and two trial was telephone‐based (Vallerand et al, ; Zhang et al, ), and one was APP‐based (Zhu et al, ). The intervention duration lasted for 4 weeks to 6 months.…”

“…The intervention duration lasted for 4 weeks to 6 months. Interventions were implemented according to a regular schedule by week (Boele et al, ; Foster et al, ; Lee et al, ; Bantum et al, ; Vallerand et al, ; Zhang et al, ) or by month (Golsteijn et al, ), while other interventions were accessible at any time study completion (Admiraal et al, ; van der Berg et al, ; Owen et al, ; Somers et al, ; Syrjala et al, ; Willems et al, ; Zhu et al, ).…”