Search

BackgroundA significant proportion of cancer survivors have overweight or obesity. Although this has negative implications for health, weight management is not a standard component of oncology aftercare. Mobile health (mHealth) technology, in combination with behavior change techniques (BCTs), has the potential to support positive lifestyle changes. Few studies have been carried out with cancer survivors; therefore, the acceptability of these tools and techniques requires further investigation. ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to examine the acceptability of a behavior change intervention using mHealth for cancer survivors with a BMI of 25 or more and to gather constructive feedback from participants. MethodsThe intervention consisted of educational sessions and an 8-week physical activity goal setting intervention delivered using mobile technology (ie, Fitbit activity monitor plus SMS contact). In the context of a two-arm randomized controlled trial, semistructured interviews were conducted to assess the retrospective acceptability of the intervention from the perspective of the recipients. The theoretical framework for the acceptability of health care interventions was used to inform a topic guide. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis. A quantitative survey was also conducted to determine the acceptability of the intervention. A total of 13 participants were interviewed, and 36 participants completed the quantitative survey. ResultsThe results strongly support the acceptability of the intervention. The majority of the survey respondents held a positive attitude toward the intervention (35/36, 97%). In qualitative reports, many of the intervention components were enjoyed and the mHealth components (ie, Fitbit and goal setting through text message contact) were rated especially positively. Responses were mixed as to whether the burden of participating in the intervention was high (6/36, 17%) or low (5/36, 14%). Participants perceived the intervention as having high efficacy in improving health and well-being (34/36, 94%). Most respondents said that they understood how the intervention works (35/36, 97%), and qualitative data show that participants’ understanding of the aim of the intervention was broader than weight management and focused more on moving on psychologically from cancer. ConclusionsOn the basis of the coherence of responses with theorized aspects of intervention acceptability, we are confident that this intervention using mHealth and BCTs is acceptable to cancer survivors with obesity or overweight. Participants made several recommendations concerning the additional provision of social support. Future studies are needed to assess the feasibility of delivery in clinical practice and the acceptability of the intervention to those delivering the intervention. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR2-10.2196/13214

Background: Brief behavioural interventions offered by healthcare professionals to target health behavioural risk factors (e.g. physical activity, diet, smoking and drug and alcohol use) can positively impact patient health outcomes. The Irish Health Service Executive (HSE) Making Every Contact Count (MECC) Programme supports healthcare professionals to offer patients brief opportunistic behavioural interventions during routine consultations. The potential for MECC to impact public health depends on its uptake and implementation.   Aim: This protocol outlines the 'Making MECC Work' research programme, a HSE/Health Behaviour Change Research Group collaboration to develop an implementation strategy to optimise uptake of MECC in Ireland. The programme will answer three research questions: (1) What determines delivery of MECC brief interventions by healthcare professionals at individual and organisational levels? (2) What are patient attitudes towards, and experiences of, receiving MECC interventions from healthcare professionals? (3) What evidence-informed implementation strategy options can be consensually developed with key stakeholders to optimise MECC implementation? Methods: In Work Package 1, we will examine determinants of MECC delivery by healthcare professionals using a multi-methods approach, including: (WP1.1) a national survey of healthcare professionals who have participated in MECC eLearning training and (WP1.2) a qualitative interview study with relevant healthcare professionals and HSE staff. In Work Package 2, we will examine patient attitudes towards, and experiences of, MECC using qualitative interviews. Work Package 3 will combine findings from Work Packages 1 and 2 using the Behaviour Change Wheel to identify and develop testable implementation strategy options (WP 3.1). Strategies will be refined and prioritised using a key stakeholder consensus process to develop a collaborative implementation blueprint to optimise and scale-up MECC (WP3.2). Discussion: Research programme outputs are expected to positively support the integration of MECC brief behaviour change interventions into the Irish healthcare system and inform the scale-up of behaviour change interventions internationally., Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed., (Copyright: © 2022 Meade O et al.)

Background: Cancer survivorship in Ireland is increasing in both frequency and longevity. However, a significant proportion of cancer survivors do not reach the recommended physical activity levels and have overweight. This has implications for both physical and psychological health, including an increased risk of subsequent and secondary cancers. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions demonstrate potential for positive health behavior change, but there is little evidence for the efficacy of mobile technology in improving health outcomes in cancer survivors with overweight or obesity., Objective: This study aims to investigate whether a personalized mHealth behavior change intervention improves physical and psychological health outcomes in cancer survivors with overweight or obesity., Methods: A sample of 123 cancer survivors (BMI≥25 kg/m 2 ) was randomly assigned to the standard care control (n=61) or intervention (n=62) condition. Group allocation was unblinded. The intervention group attended a 4-hour tailored lifestyle education and information session with physiotherapists, a dietician, and a clinical psychologist to support self-management of health behavior. Over the following 12 weeks, participants engaged in personalized goal setting to incrementally increase physical activity (with feedback and review of goals through SMS text messaging contact with the research team). Direct measures of physical activity were collected using a Fitbit accelerometer. Data on anthropometric, functional exercise capacity, dietary behavior, and psychological measures were collected at face-to-face assessments in a single hospital site at baseline (T0), 12 weeks (T1; intervention end), and 24 weeks (T2; follow-up)., Results: The rate of attrition was 21% (13/61) for the control condition and 14% (9/62) for the intervention condition. Using intent-to-treat analysis, significant reductions in BMI (F 2,242 =4.149; P=.02; ηp 2 =0.033) and waist circumference (F 2,242 =3.342; P=.04; ηp 2 =0.027) were observed in the intervention group. Over the 24-week study, BMI was reduced by 0.52 in the intervention condition, relative to a nonsignificant reduction of 0.11 in the control arm. Waist circumference was reduced by 3.02 cm in the intervention condition relative to 1.82 cm in the control condition. Physical activity level was significantly higher in the intervention group on 8 of the 12 weeks of the intervention phase and on 5 of the 12 weeks of the follow-up period, accounting for up to 2500 additional steps per day (mean 2032, SD 270)., Conclusions: The results demonstrate that for cancer survivors with a BMI≥25 kg/m 2 , lifestyle education and personalized goal setting using mobile technology can yield significant changes in clinically relevant health indicators. Further research is needed to elucidate the mechanisms of behavior change and explore the capacity for mHealth interventions to improve broader health and well-being outcomes in the growing population of cancer survivors., Trial Registration: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN18676721; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN18676721., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): RR2-10.2196/13214., (©Jane C Walsh, Janice Richmond, Jenny Mc Sharry, AnnMarie Groarke, Liam Glynn, Mary Grace Kelly, Owen Harney, Jenny M Groarke. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (https://mhealth.jmir.org), 05.07.2021.)

Background: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is an auto-immune condition which requires intensive self-management. Diabetes self-management is challenging, especially during young adulthood. Effective interventions to improve outcomes for young adults with T1D are needed. This paper describes the development of the D1 Now intervention, employing a user-centred approach to engage with stakeholders in parallel with the application of theory. Methods: Intervention development consisted of 4 phases: 1) the formation of a public and patient involvement (PPI) Young Adult Panel (YAP); 2) a systematic review to synthesise evidence regarding the effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving outcomes for young adults with T1D; 3) understand young adults' diabetes self-management behaviour through engagement with key stakeholders; and 4) an expert consensus meeting to discuss self-management strategies identified in Phase 1 and 3 that would form the core components of the D1 Now intervention. Results: The YAP resulted in meaningful involvement between young adults, researchers and service providers. The systematic review highlighted a lack of quality intervention studies. Qualitative findings highlighted how young adult self-management is driven by complex interactions between external resources, which influence capability, and motivation. The expert panel in Phase 4 highlighted focus areas to improve outcomes for young adults and implementation strategies. Subsequent to these 4 phases, 3 intervention components have been identified: 1) a key worker to liaise with the young adult; 2) an online portal to facilitate relationship building between staff and young adults; and 3) an agenda setting tool to facilitate joint decision-making. Conclusions: This study described the systematic development of an intervention underpinned by theoretical frameworks and PPI, and has identified components for the D1 Now intervention. The resulting intervention content will now be subject to an intervention optimisation process., Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed., (Copyright: © 2018 Walsh DMJ et al.)