Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

An organizational approach to exploring the determinants of community-based exercise program implementation for breast cancer survivors

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The majority of breast cancer survivors do not engage in sufficient levels of exercise. Community-based exercise programs (CBEP) may mitigate low rates of exercise participation; however, few programs exist. Previous research exploring the determinants of CBEP implementation for cancer survivors is limited in that it has predominantly focused on cancer survivor perspectives or it has failed to rely on a theoretical framework to explore determinants to implementation across various implementation domains. An organizational exploration of the determinants of CBEP implementation for breast cancer survivors is warranted to guide future program implementation.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to apply the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to explore the determinants of CBEP implementation for breast cancer survivors from a program provider perspective.

Methods

Data collection and analysis were guided by the CFIR. Program providers completed an online questionnaire and an interview. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Resulting codes were deductively mapped onto the CFIR.

Results

Seven barriers and seven facilitators were identified, with three key influencers (e.g., program awareness, financial support, and knowledge regarding the benefits of exercise for breast cancer survivors) cited as both barriers and facilitators to program implementation. Barriers primarily operated within the outer setting (e.g., needs and resources) domain of the CFIR, whereas facilitators and key influencers operated across multiple CFIR domains (e.g., culture and planning).

Conclusions

Study findings provide insight into the current challenges to CBEP implementation experienced by program providers and highlight potential avenues for future exercise program development and implementation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [JT], upon reasonable request.

Code availability

Codes that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [JT], upon reasonable request.

References

  1. National Cancer Institute (2020) NCI dictionary of cancer terms [Internet]. Bethesda, Maryland. Available from: https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms/def/survivorship. Accessed 21 Jan 2019

  2. Lynch BM, Dunstan DW, Healy GN et al (2010) Objectively measured physical activity and sedentary time of breast cancer survivors, and associations with adiposity: findings from NHANES (2003–2006). Cancer Causes Control 21:283–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Battaglini CL, Mills RC, Phillips BL et al (2014) Twenty-five years of research on the effects of exercise training in breast cancer survivors: a systematic review of the literature. World J Clin Oncol 5:177–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Segal R, Zwaal C, Green E et al (2017) Exercise for people with cancer: a systematic review. Curr Oncol 24:e290-2315

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Campbell KL, Winters-Stone KM, Wiskemann J et al (2019) Exercise guidelines for cancer survivors: consensus statement from international multidisciplinary roundtable. Med Sci Sports Exerc 51:2375–2390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sabiston CM, Brunet J, Vallance JK et al (2014) Prospective examination of objectively assessed physical activity and sedentary time after breast cancer treatment: sitting on the crest of the teachable moment. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 23:1324–1330

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Covington KR, Hidde MC, Pergolotti M et al (2019) Community-based exercise programs for cancer survivors: a scoping review of practice-based evidence. Support Care Cancer 27:4435–4450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Santa Mina D, Petrella A, Currie KL et al (2015) Enablers and barriers in delivery of a cancer exercise program: the Canadian experience. Curr Oncol 22:374–384

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Newton RU (2018) Overwhelming research and clinical evidence of exercise medicine efficacy in cancer management—translation into practice is the challenge before us. Curr Oncol 25:117–118

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK (2018) Dissemination and implementation research in health: translating science to practice. Second. Dissem. Implement. Res. Heal. Transl. Sci. to Pract. Oxford University Press, New York

  11. Clifford BK, Mizrahi D, Sandler CX et al (2018) Barriers and facilitators of exercise experienced by cancer survivors: a mixed methods systematic review. Support Care Cancer 26:685–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. IJsbrandy C, Hermens RPMG, Boerboom LWM et al (2019) Implementing physical activity programs for patients with cancer in current practice: patients’ experienced barriers and facilitators. J Cancer Surviv 13:703–712

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hefferon K, Murphy H, McLeod J et al (2013) Understanding barriers to exercise implementation 5-year post-breast cancer diagnosis: a large-scale qualitative study. Health Educ Res 28:843–856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. IJsbrandy C, van Harten WH, Gerritsen WR et al (2020) Healthcare professionals’ perspectives of barriers and facilitators in implementing physical activity programmes delivered to cancer survivors in a shared-care model: a qualitative study. Support Care Cancer 28:3429–3440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nilsen P (2015) Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implement Sci 10:53. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0242-0

  16. Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE et al (2009) Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci 4:50. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-50

  17. Rogers LQ, Goncalves L, Martin MY et al (2019) Beyond efficacy: a qualitative organizational perspective on key implementation science constructs important to physical activity intervention translation to rural community cancer care sites. J Cancer Surviv 13:537–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Perry CK, Ali W, Solanki E et al (2020) Attitudes and beliefs of older female breast cancer survivors and providers about exercise in cancer care. Oncol Nurs Forum 47:56–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Guba EG, Lincoln YS (2005) Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) The Sage handbook of qualitative research, 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, p 191–215

  20. de Oliveira C, Weir S, Rangrej J et al (2018) The economic burden of cancer care in Canada: a population-based cost study. C Open 6:E1–E10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Brenner DR, Weir HK, Demers AA et al (2020) Projected estimates of cancer in Canada in 2020. CMAJ 192:E199–E205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fong AJ, Jones JM, Faulkner G et al (2018) Exploring cancer centres for physical activity and sedentary behaviour support for breast cancer survivors. Curr Oncol 25:e365–e372

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Santa Mina D, Sabiston CM, Au D et al (2018) Connecting people with cancer to physical activity and exercise programs: a pathway to create accessibility and engagement. Curr Oncol 25:149–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. D’Urzo KA, Man KE, Bassett-Gunter RL et al (2019) Identifying “real-world” initiatives for knowledge translation tools: a case study of community-based physical activity programs for persons with physical disability in Canada. Transl Behav Med 9:797–809

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tomasone JR, Zwaal C, Kim G et al (2017) Moving guidelines into action: a report from cancer care Ontario’s event let’s get moving: exercise and rehabilitation for cancer patients. Curr Oncol 24:e65–e74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. McEachern BM, Jackson J, Yungblut S et al (2019) Barriers and facilitators to implementing exercise is medicine Canada on campus groups. Health Promot Pract 20:751–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Elo S, Kyngäs H (2008) The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs 62:107–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. NVivo qualitative data analysis software [Internet]. QSR International; 1999. Available from: https://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo-qualitative-data-analysis-software/support-services/nvivo-downloads

  29. Smith B, Sparkes AC (2016) Routledge handbook of qualitative research in sport and exercise. London

  30. Nyrop KA, Deal AM, Williams GR et al (2016) Physical activity communication between oncology providers and patients with early-stage breast, colon, or prostate cancer. Cancer 122:470–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Jones LW, Courneya KS, Peddle C et al (2005) Oncologists’ opinions towards recommending exercise to patients with cancer: a Canadian national survey. Support Care Cancer 13:929–937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Nadler M, Bainbridge D, Tomasone J et al (2017) Oncology care provider perspectives on exercise promotion in people with cancer: an examination of knowledge, practices, barriers, and facilitators. Support Care Cancer 25:2297–2304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Weiner BJ, Lewis MA, Linnan LA (2009) Using organization theory to understand the determinants of effective implementation of worksite health promotion programs. Health Educ Res 24:292–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kothari A, McCutcheon C, Graham ID (2017) Defining integrated knowledge translation and moving forward: a response to recent commentaries. Int J Heal Policy Manag 6:299–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Schölmerich VLN, Kawachi I (2016) Translating the socio-ecological perspective into multilevel interventions: gaps between theory and practice. Heal Educ Behav 43:17–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kirk MA, Kelley C, Yankey N et al (2016) A systematic review of the use of the consolidated framework for implementation research. Implement Sci 11

  37. Poucher ZA, Tamminen KA, Caron JG et al (2020) Thinking through and designing qualitative research studies: a focused mapping review of 30 years of qualitative research in sport psychology. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol 13:163–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation grant #499062. Kaitlyn D. Kauffeldt was supported by a graduate student scholarship from Queen Elizabeth II Graduate Scholarship in Science and Technology. Catherine M. Sabiston holds a Canada Research Chair (Tier II) in Physical Activity and Mental Health.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Kinesiology and Health Studies, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada

    Kaitlyn D. Kauffeldt & Jennifer R. Tomasone

  2. Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Catherine M. Sabiston & Daniel Santa Mina

Authors
  1. Kaitlyn D. Kauffeldt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Catherine M. Sabiston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel Santa Mina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jennifer R. Tomasone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Kaitlyn D. Kauffeldt. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Kaitlyn D. Kauffeldt and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer R. Tomasone.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

The methodology for this study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Queen’s University (reference #602018).

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in this study.

Consent for publication

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in this study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 116 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kauffeldt, K.D., Sabiston, C.M., Santa Mina, D. et al. An organizational approach to exploring the determinants of community-based exercise program implementation for breast cancer survivors. Support Care Cancer 30, 2183–2196 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06591-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06591-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation