A dance intervention for cancer survivors and their partners (RHYTHM)
- 714 Downloads
The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and impact of a ballroom dance intervention on improving quality of life (QOL) and relationship outcomes in cancer survivors and their partners.
We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial with two arms (Restoring Health in You (and Your Partner) through Movement, RHYTHM): (1) immediate dance intervention and (2) delayed intervention (wait-list control). The intervention consisted of 10 private weekly dance lessons and 2 practice parties over 12 weeks. Main outcomes were physical activity (Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire), functional capacity (6 Minute Walk Test), QOL (SF-36), Couples’ trust (Dyadic Trust Scale), and other dyadic outcomes. Exit interviews were completed by all participating couples.
Thirty-one women survivors (68% breast cancer) and their partners participated. Survivors were 57.9 years old on average and 22.6% African American. Partners had similar characteristics. RHYTHM had significant positive effects on physical activity (p = 0.05), on the mental component of QOL (p = 0.04), on vitality (p = 0.03), and on the dyadic trust scale (p = 0.04). Couples expressed satisfaction with the intervention including appreciating the opportunity to spend time and exercise together. Survivors saw this light-intensity physical activity as easing them into becoming more physically active.
Light intensity ballroom dancing has the potential to improve cancer survivors’ QOL. Larger trials are needed to build strong support for this ubiquitous and acceptable activity.
Implications for cancer survivors
Ballroom dance may be an important tool for cancer survivors to return to a physically active life and improve QOL and other aspects of their intimate life.
KeywordsNeoplasms Survivors Physical activity Dance Quality of life Couples
Authors are thankful to Richard Silver of Fred Astaire Dance Studios, the staff of the Recruitment and Retention Shared Facility of the UAB Comprehensive Cancer Center, Aquila Brown-Galvan, Amy Dobelstein, and Subrena Felder, as well as RHYTHM participants.
Conceptualization: MP, MYM, WDW, SM, RAO
Methodology: MP, MYM, WDW, RAO, KMK
Data curation and analysis: RAO, CPL, KMK
Investigation: RAO, CPL, KMK, MP, MYM
Writing—original: MP, MYM
Supervision, project administration, and funding acquisition: MP, MYM
Compliance with ethical standards
This study was funded by the National Cancer Institute R21CA158678 and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences UL1TR001417.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Alabama at Birmingham. All procedures involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
- 5.Schmid D, Leitzmann MF. Association between physical activity and mortality among breast cancer and colorectal cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology / ESMO. 2014;25(7):1293–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Cramp F, Daniel J. Exercise for the management of cancer-related fatigue in adults. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2008(2):CD006145.Google Scholar
- 8.Duijts SF, Faber MM, Oldenburg HS, van Beurden M, Aaronson NK. Effectiveness of behavioral techniques and physical exercise on psychosocial functioning and health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients and survivors—a meta-analysis. Psycho-Oncology. 2011;20(2):115–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Thorsen L, Courneya KS, Stevinson C, Fossa SD. A systematic review of physical activity in prostate cancer survivors: outcomes, prevalence, and determinants. Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer. 2008;16(9):987–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Lin YY, Rau KM, Lin CC. Longitudinal study on the impact of physical activity on the symptoms of lung cancer survivors. Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer. 2015.Google Scholar
- 15.Thraen-Borowski KM, Trentham-Dietz A, Edwards DF, Koltyn KF, Colbert LH. Dose-response relationships between physical activity, social participation, and health-related quality of life in colorectal cancer survivors. Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice. 2013;7(3):369–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Paterson C, Robertson A, Smith A, Nabi G. Identifying the unmet supportive care needs of men living with and beyond prostate cancer: a systematic review. European journal of oncology nursing : the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society. 2015.Google Scholar
- 29.Song L, Northouse LL, Braun TM, Zhang L, Cimprich B, Ronis DL, et al. Assessing longitudinal quality of life in prostate cancer patients and their spouses: a multilevel modeling approach. Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation. 2011;20(3):371–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Chelune G, Robison J, Kommor M. A cognitive interactional model of intimate relationships. In: Derlega V, editor. Communication, intimacy, and close relationships. Orlando, FL: Academis Press, Inc; 1984. p. 11–40.Google Scholar
- 32.Cahalin LP, Arena R, Labate V, Bandera F, Lavie CJ, Guazzi M. Heart rate recovery after the 6 min walk test rather than distance ambulated is a powerful prognostic indicator in heart failure with reduced and preserved ejection fraction: a comparison with cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Eur J Heart Fail. 2013;15(5):519–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 36.Ware J. SF-36 health survey update. In: Maruish M, editor. The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes assessment. 3rd ed. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2004.Google Scholar
- 39.Spanier G, Filsinger E. Marriage and family assessment: a sourcebook for family therapy. In: Filsinger E, editor. The dyadic adjustment scale. Beverly Hills: Sage; 1983. p. 155–68.Google Scholar
- 40.Manne S, Ostroff J, Rini C, Fox K, Goldstein L, Grana G. The interpersonal process model of intimacy: the role of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and partner responsiveness in interactions between breast cancer patients and their partners. J Fam Psychol. 2004;18(4):589–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 47.Bjorner JB, Lyng Wolden M, Gundgaard J, Miller KA. Benchmarks for interpretation of score differences on the SF-36 health survey for patients with diabetes. Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. 2013;16(6):993–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 49.Terp H, Rottmann N, Larsen PV, Hagedoorn M, Flyger H, Kroman N, et al. Participation in questionnaire studies among couples affected by breast cancer. Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer. 2015;23(7):1907–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar