Cargando…
A Novel Behavioral Intervention for Rural Appalachian Cancer Survivors (weSurvive): Participatory Development and Proof-of-Concept Testing
BACKGROUND: Addressing the modifiable health behaviors of cancer survivors is important in rural communities that are disproportionately impacted by cancer (eg, those in Central Appalachia). However, such efforts are limited, and existing interventions may not meet the needs of rural communities. OB...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
JMIR Publications
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8076984/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33843597 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/26010 |
_version_ | 1783684798905057280 |
---|---|
author | Porter, Kathleen J Moon, Katherine E LeBaron, Virginia T Zoellner, Jamie M |
author_facet | Porter, Kathleen J Moon, Katherine E LeBaron, Virginia T Zoellner, Jamie M |
author_sort | Porter, Kathleen J |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Addressing the modifiable health behaviors of cancer survivors is important in rural communities that are disproportionately impacted by cancer (eg, those in Central Appalachia). However, such efforts are limited, and existing interventions may not meet the needs of rural communities. OBJECTIVE: This study describes the development and proof-of-concept testing of weSurvive, a behavioral intervention for rural Appalachian cancer survivors. METHODS: The Obesity-Related Behavioral Intervention Trials (ORBIT) model, a systematic model for designing behavioral interventions, informed the study design. An advisory team (n=10) of community stakeholders and researchers engaged in a participatory process to identify desirable features for interventions targeting rural cancer survivors. The resulting multimodal, 13-week weSurvive intervention was delivered to 12 participants across the two cohorts. Intervention components included in-person group classes and group and individualized telehealth calls. Indicators reflecting five feasibility domains (acceptability, demand, practicality, implementation, and limited efficacy) were measured using concurrent mixed methods. Pre-post changes and effect sizes were assessed for limited efficacy data. Descriptive statistics and content analysis were used to summarize data for other domains. RESULTS: Participants reported high program satisfaction (acceptability). Indicators of demand included enrollment of cancer survivors with various cancer types and attrition (1/12, 8%), recruitment (12/41, 30%), and attendance (median 62%) rates. Dietary (7/12, 59%) and physical activity (PA; 10/12, 83%) behaviors were the most frequently chosen behavioral targets. However, the findings indicate that participants did not fully engage in action planning activities, including setting specific goals. Implementation indicators showed 100% researcher fidelity to delivery and retention protocols, whereas practicality indicators highlighted participation barriers. Pre-post changes in limited efficacy outcomes regarding cancer-specific beliefs and knowledge and behavior-specific self-efficacy, intentions, and behaviors were in desired directions and demonstrated small and moderate effect sizes. Regarding dietary and PA behaviors, effect sizes for fruit and vegetable intake, snacks, dietary fat, and minutes of moderate-to-vigorous activity were small (Cohen d=0.00 to 0.32), whereas the effect sizes for change in PA were small to medium (Cohen d=0.22 to 0.45). CONCLUSIONS: weSurvive has the potential to be a feasible intervention for rural Appalachian cancer survivors. It will be refined and further tested based on the study findings, which also provide recommendations for other behavioral interventions targeting rural cancer survivors. Recommendations included adding additional recruitment and engagement strategies to increase demand and practicality as well as increasing accountability and motivation for participant involvement in self-monitoring activities through the use of technology (eg, text messaging). Furthermore, this study highlights the importance of using a systematic model (eg, the ORBIT framework) and small-scale proof-of-concept studies when adapting or developing behavioral interventions, as doing so identifies the intervention’s potential for feasibility and areas that need improvement before time- and resource-intensive efficacy trials. This could support a more efficient translation into practice. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8076984 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | JMIR Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80769842021-05-06 A Novel Behavioral Intervention for Rural Appalachian Cancer Survivors (weSurvive): Participatory Development and Proof-of-Concept Testing Porter, Kathleen J Moon, Katherine E LeBaron, Virginia T Zoellner, Jamie M JMIR Cancer Original Paper BACKGROUND: Addressing the modifiable health behaviors of cancer survivors is important in rural communities that are disproportionately impacted by cancer (eg, those in Central Appalachia). However, such efforts are limited, and existing interventions may not meet the needs of rural communities. OBJECTIVE: This study describes the development and proof-of-concept testing of weSurvive, a behavioral intervention for rural Appalachian cancer survivors. METHODS: The Obesity-Related Behavioral Intervention Trials (ORBIT) model, a systematic model for designing behavioral interventions, informed the study design. An advisory team (n=10) of community stakeholders and researchers engaged in a participatory process to identify desirable features for interventions targeting rural cancer survivors. The resulting multimodal, 13-week weSurvive intervention was delivered to 12 participants across the two cohorts. Intervention components included in-person group classes and group and individualized telehealth calls. Indicators reflecting five feasibility domains (acceptability, demand, practicality, implementation, and limited efficacy) were measured using concurrent mixed methods. Pre-post changes and effect sizes were assessed for limited efficacy data. Descriptive statistics and content analysis were used to summarize data for other domains. RESULTS: Participants reported high program satisfaction (acceptability). Indicators of demand included enrollment of cancer survivors with various cancer types and attrition (1/12, 8%), recruitment (12/41, 30%), and attendance (median 62%) rates. Dietary (7/12, 59%) and physical activity (PA; 10/12, 83%) behaviors were the most frequently chosen behavioral targets. However, the findings indicate that participants did not fully engage in action planning activities, including setting specific goals. Implementation indicators showed 100% researcher fidelity to delivery and retention protocols, whereas practicality indicators highlighted participation barriers. Pre-post changes in limited efficacy outcomes regarding cancer-specific beliefs and knowledge and behavior-specific self-efficacy, intentions, and behaviors were in desired directions and demonstrated small and moderate effect sizes. Regarding dietary and PA behaviors, effect sizes for fruit and vegetable intake, snacks, dietary fat, and minutes of moderate-to-vigorous activity were small (Cohen d=0.00 to 0.32), whereas the effect sizes for change in PA were small to medium (Cohen d=0.22 to 0.45). CONCLUSIONS: weSurvive has the potential to be a feasible intervention for rural Appalachian cancer survivors. It will be refined and further tested based on the study findings, which also provide recommendations for other behavioral interventions targeting rural cancer survivors. Recommendations included adding additional recruitment and engagement strategies to increase demand and practicality as well as increasing accountability and motivation for participant involvement in self-monitoring activities through the use of technology (eg, text messaging). Furthermore, this study highlights the importance of using a systematic model (eg, the ORBIT framework) and small-scale proof-of-concept studies when adapting or developing behavioral interventions, as doing so identifies the intervention’s potential for feasibility and areas that need improvement before time- and resource-intensive efficacy trials. This could support a more efficient translation into practice. JMIR Publications 2021-04-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8076984/ /pubmed/33843597 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/26010 Text en ©Kathleen J Porter, Katherine E Moon, Virginia T LeBaron, Jamie M Zoellner. Originally published in JMIR Cancer (http://cancer.jmir.org), 12.04.2021. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Cancer, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://cancer.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Porter, Kathleen J Moon, Katherine E LeBaron, Virginia T Zoellner, Jamie M A Novel Behavioral Intervention for Rural Appalachian Cancer Survivors (weSurvive): Participatory Development and Proof-of-Concept Testing |
title | A Novel Behavioral Intervention for Rural Appalachian Cancer Survivors (weSurvive): Participatory Development and Proof-of-Concept Testing |
title_full | A Novel Behavioral Intervention for Rural Appalachian Cancer Survivors (weSurvive): Participatory Development and Proof-of-Concept Testing |
title_fullStr | A Novel Behavioral Intervention for Rural Appalachian Cancer Survivors (weSurvive): Participatory Development and Proof-of-Concept Testing |
title_full_unstemmed | A Novel Behavioral Intervention for Rural Appalachian Cancer Survivors (weSurvive): Participatory Development and Proof-of-Concept Testing |
title_short | A Novel Behavioral Intervention for Rural Appalachian Cancer Survivors (weSurvive): Participatory Development and Proof-of-Concept Testing |
title_sort | novel behavioral intervention for rural appalachian cancer survivors (wesurvive): participatory development and proof-of-concept testing |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8076984/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33843597 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/26010 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT porterkathleenj anovelbehavioralinterventionforruralappalachiancancersurvivorswesurviveparticipatorydevelopmentandproofofconcepttesting AT moonkatherinee anovelbehavioralinterventionforruralappalachiancancersurvivorswesurviveparticipatorydevelopmentandproofofconcepttesting AT lebaronvirginiat anovelbehavioralinterventionforruralappalachiancancersurvivorswesurviveparticipatorydevelopmentandproofofconcepttesting AT zoellnerjamiem anovelbehavioralinterventionforruralappalachiancancersurvivorswesurviveparticipatorydevelopmentandproofofconcepttesting AT porterkathleenj novelbehavioralinterventionforruralappalachiancancersurvivorswesurviveparticipatorydevelopmentandproofofconcepttesting AT moonkatherinee novelbehavioralinterventionforruralappalachiancancersurvivorswesurviveparticipatorydevelopmentandproofofconcepttesting AT lebaronvirginiat novelbehavioralinterventionforruralappalachiancancersurvivorswesurviveparticipatorydevelopmentandproofofconcepttesting AT zoellnerjamiem novelbehavioralinterventionforruralappalachiancancersurvivorswesurviveparticipatorydevelopmentandproofofconcepttesting |