3.8 Article

A Digital Educational Intervention With Wearable Activity Trackers to Support Health Behaviors Among Childhood Cancer Survivors: Pilot Feasibility and Acceptability Study

期刊

JMIR CANCER
卷 8, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

JMIR PUBLICATIONS, INC
DOI: 10.2196/38367

关键词

childhood cancer; survivorship; physical activity; exercise; activity tracker; eHealth; education; behavior change

类别

资金

  1. Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship
  2. Cancer Institute NSW Early Career Fellowship [2020/ECF1144]
  3. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [APP2008300]
  4. Kids Cancer Project

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of iBounce, a digital health intervention, for educating and engaging childhood cancer survivors in physical activity. The study found that iBounce was feasible and acceptable among survivors, but no significant changes were observed in physical activity levels or health-related quality of life.
Background: Childhood cancer survivors are at increased risk of cardiometabolic complications that are exacerbated by poor health behaviors. Critically, many survivors do not meet physical activity guidelines. Objective: The primary aim was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of iBounce, a digital health intervention for educating and engaging survivors in physical activity. Our secondary aims were to assess the change in survivors' physical activity levels and behaviors, aerobic fitness, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after participating in the iBounce program. Methods: We recruited survivors aged 8 to 13 years who were & GE;12 months post cancer treatment completion. The app-based program involved 10 educational modules, goal setting, and home-based physical activities monitored using an activity tracker. We assessed objective physical activity levels and behaviors using cluster analysis, aerobic fitness, and HRQoL at baseline and after the intervention (week 12). Parents were trained to reassess aerobic fitness at home at follow-up (week 24). Results: In total, 30 participants opted in, of whom 27 (90%) completed baseline assessments, and 23 (77%) commenced iBounce. Our opt-in rate was 59% (30/51), and most (19/23, 83%) of the survivors completed the intervention. More than half (13/23, 57%) of the survivors completed all 10 modules (median 10, IQR 4-10). We achieved a high retention rate (19/27, 70%) and activity tracker compliance (15/19, 79%), and there were no intervention-related adverse events. Survivors reported high satisfaction with iBounce (median enjoyment score 75%; ease-of-use score 86%), but lower satisfaction with the activity tracker (median enjoyment score 60%). Parents reported the program activities to be acceptable (median score 70%), and their overall satisfaction was 60%, potentially because of technological difficulties that resulted in the program becoming disjointed. We did not observe any significant changes in physical activity levels or HRQoL at week 12. Our subgroup analysis for changes in physical activity behaviors in participants (n=11) revealed five cluster groups: most active, active, moderately active, occasionally active, and least active. Of these 11 survivors, 3 (27%) moved to a more active cluster group, highlighting their engagement in more frequent and sustained bouts of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity; 6 (56%) stayed in the same cluster; and 2 (18%) moved to a less active cluster. The survivors' mean aerobic fitness percentiles increased after completing iBounce (change +17, 95% CI 1.7-32.1; P=.03) but not at follow-up (P=.39). Conclusions: We demonstrated iBounce to be feasible for delivery and acceptable among survivors, despite some technical difficulties. The distance-delivered format provides an opportunity to engage survivors in physical activity at home and may address barriers to care, particularly for regional or remote families. We will use these pilot findings to evaluate an updated version of iBounce.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据