Advertisement

Supportive Care in Cancer

, Volume 21, Issue 6, pp 1697–1708 | Cite as

A focus group study exploring gynecological cancer survivors’ experiences and perceptions of participating in a RCT testing the efficacy of a home-based physical activity intervention

  • C. M. Donnelly
  • A. Lowe-Strong
  • J. P. Rankin
  • A. Campbell
  • J. M. Blaney
  • J. H. GraceyEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to explore gynecological cancer survivors' perceptions and experiences following participation in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) testing the efficacy of a home-based physical activity behavioral change intervention (Donnelly et al., Gynecol Oncol 122:618–624, 2011).

Methods

All participants completing a two-armed parallel RCT were invited to participate in the study (31/33) (Donnelly et al., Gynecol Oncol 122:618–624, 2011). Sixteen participants took part (16/31; physical activity (PA) group n = 9, contact control (CC) group n = 7). Four qualitative group interviews were conducted (focus group size 3–5). A structured interview guide was followed by an independent moderator. Groups were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using the framework approach (Ritchie and Spencer 2001), a five-stage qualitative method of analysis.

Results

One of the most unanimously perceived benefits of taking part in the programme regarded participants' psychological well-being. Additional benefits included improved physical fitness and functioning. Important programme features included the weekly telephone calls from a physiotherapist, the patient–professional relationship, and goal setting. Participants' own motivation and programme timing were also identified as important factors. Suggestions for improvements include: opportunities for social interaction with other gynecological cancer survivors and greater exercise choice.

Conclusion

Findings suggest that women diagnosed with gynecological cancer perceive participation in physical activity as important and participation provides benefits in terms of psychological well-being and improved physical functioning. Support for continuation of many of the current features of the home-based programme was provided. Findings provide insight and rationale for the selection of components for future home-based physical activity interventions. Findings also support further research into the development of multidimensional interventions for the gynecological cancer population.

Keywords

Physical activity Cancer Fatigue Gynecological cancer 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Department for Employment and Learning, Northern Ireland. The authors also thank Dr. Karen Beattie (focus group moderator, Public Health Agency, Northern Ireland).

Conflict of interest

None.

Supplementary material

520_2012_1716_MOESM1_ESM.doc (29 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 29 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Speck RM, Courneya KS, Masse LC, Duval S, Schmitz KH (2010) An update of controlled physical activity trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cancer Surv 4(2):87–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ivanoff D (2002) Focus group discussions as a tool for developing a health education programme for elderly persons with visual impairment. Scand J Occup Ther 9:3–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Midtgaard J, Rorth OM, Stelter OR, Adamsen NL (2006) The group matters: an explorative study of group cohesion and quality of life in cancer patients participating in physical exercise intervention during treatment. Eur J Cancer Care 15:25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Korstjen I, Mesters I, Gijsen B, Van Den Borne B (2008) Cancer patients' views on rehabilitation and quality of life: a programme audit. Eur J Cancer Care 17:290–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Emslie C, Whyte F, Campbell A, Mutrie N, Lee L, Ritchie D, Kearney N (2007) ‘I wouldn't have been interested in just sitting round a table talking about cancer'; exploring the experiences of women with breast cancer in a group exercise trial. Health Educ Res 22:827–838PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Karvinen KH, Courneya KS, Campbell KL, Pearcey RG, Dundas G, Capstick V, Tonkin KS (2006) Exercise preferences of endometrial cancer survivors: a population-based study. Cancer Nurs 29:259–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stevinson C, Capstick V, Schepansk A, Tonkin K, Vallance JK, Ladha AB, Steed H, Faught W, Courneya KS (2009) Physical activity preferences of ovarian cancer survivors. Psycho-Oncol 18:422–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Donnelly CM, Blaney JM, Lowe-Strong A, Rankin JP, Campbell A, McCrum-Gardner E, Gracey JH (2011) A randomised controlled trial testing the feasibility and efficacy of a physical activity behavioural change intervention in managing fatigue with gynaecological cancer survivors. Gynecol Oncol 122:618–624PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mock V, Pickett M, Ropka ME, Lin ME, Stewart KJ, Rhodes VA, Mc Daniel R, Grimm PM, Krumm S, Mc Corkle R (2001) Fatigue and quality of life outcomes of exercise during cancer treatment. Can Prac 9:119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mock V, Frangakis C, Davidson NE, Ropka ME, Pickett M, Poniatowski B, Stewart KJ, Cameron L, Zawacki K, Podewils LJ, Cohen G, Mc Corkle R (2005) Exercise manages fatigue during breast cancer treatment: a randomised controlled trial. Psycho-Onco 14:464–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Proschaska JO, Diclemente CC (1982) Transtheoretical therapy: towards a more integrative model of change. Psychother-Theor Res 19:276–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Loughlan C, Mutrie N (1995) Conducting an exercise programme: guidelines for health professionals. J Inst Health Educ 33:78–82Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    De Haes JCJM, Olschewski M, Fayers P, Visser MRM, Cull A, Hopwood P, Sanderman R (1996) Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients with the Rotterdam Symptom Check List (RSCL): A manual. Northern Centre for Healthcare Research, University of Groningen, GroningenGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sim J, Snell J (1996) Focus groups in physiotherapy evaluation and research. Physiotherapy 82:189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Krueger RA (1998) Developing questions for focus groups, 1st edn. Sage, Newbury Park, p 21Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Morrison R, Peoples L (1998) Using focus group methodology in nursing. The J Cont Educ Nurs 20:62–65Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ritchie J, Spencer L (2001) Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess RG (eds) Analysing qualitative data. Routledge, London, pp 173–194Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hennessy EM, Stevinson C, Fox KR (2005) Preliminary study of the lived experience of exercise for cancer survivors. Eur J Oncol Nurs 9:155–166PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brown MA, Shirley JL (2005) Enhancing women's mood and energy. Holist Nurs Pract 19:278–284PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lombard DN, Lombard TN, Winnett RA (1995) Walking to meet health guidelines. The effect of prompting frequency and prompt structure. Health Psychol 14:164–170PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Whiteley JA, Lewis B, Napolitan MA and Marcus BH (2006) Health counselling skills In: ACSM's resource manual for guidelines for exercise testing and prescription 5th Edn Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rollnick S, Mason P, Butler C (1999) Health behaviour change: A guide for practitioners. Churchill Livingstone, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rogers LQ, Hopkins-Price P, Vicari S, Pamenter R, Courneya KS, Markwell S, Verhulst S, Hoelzer K, Naritoku C, Jones L, Dunnington G, Lanzotti V, Wynstra J, Shah L, Edson B, Graff A, Lowy M (2009) A randomized trial to increase physical activity in breast cancer survivors. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41:935–946PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Steginga SK, Lynch BM, Hawkes A, Dunn AL, Aitken JF (2009) Antecedents of domain specific quality of life after colorectal cancer. Psycho-Oncol 18(2):216–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Beesley VL, Eakin EG, Monika J, Battistutta D (2008) Gynaecological cancer survivors' health behaviours and their associations with quality of life. Cancer Cause Control 19:775–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Beesley EE, Steginga S, Aitken J, Dunn J, Battistutta D (2008) Unmet needs of gynaecological cancer survivors: implications for developing community support services. Psycho-Oncol 17:392–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hawkes AL, Gollschewski S, Lynch BM, Chambers S (2009) A telephone-delivered lifestyle intervention for colorectal cancer survivors ‘CanChange’: a pilot study. Pscyho-Oncol 13:449–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. M. Donnelly
    • 1
  • A. Lowe-Strong
    • 1
  • J. P. Rankin
    • 2
  • A. Campbell
    • 3
  • J. M. Blaney
    • 2
  • J. H. Gracey
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Health and Rehabilitation Sciences Research CentreUniversity of UlsterNewtownabbeyUK
  2. 2.Physiotherapy Department, Cancer Centre, Belfast Health and Social Care TrustBelfastUK
  3. 3.University of DundeeDundeeUK

Personalised recommendations