4.6 Article

Self-efficacy, quality of life, and weight loss in overweight/obese endometrial cancer survivors (SUCCEED): A randomized controlled trial

期刊

GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY
卷 132, 期 2, 页码 397-402

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.12.023

关键词

Endometrial cancer; Lifestyle; Quality of life

资金

  1. American Cancer Society

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. More patient-centered programming is essential for endometrial cancer (EC) survivors needing to lose weight to reduce cardiovascular disease risk (CVD). The purpose of this study was to improve self-efficacy (SE) and quality of life (QOL) using a lifestyle intervention program designed for weight loss. Methods. Overweight and obese early-stage EC survivors, n = 75, were randomized into two groups: 1) Survivors of Uterine Cancer Empowered by Exercise and Healthy Diet (SUCCEED), a six-month lifestyle intervention or 2) a usual care group (UC). Participants completed the Weight Efficacy Lifestyle Questionnaire (WEL) to assess SE and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General (FACT-G) to measure QOL, and their body mass index (BMI) was calculated at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Mixed, repeated-measures ANCOVA models with baseline covariates were employed using SPSS 20.0. Results. Positive effects in every WEL domain, including the total score, were statistically significant in the SUCCEED group versus the UC group. A linear regression model demonstrated that, if BMI decreased by 1 unit, the total WEL score increased by 4.49 points. Significant negative correlations were found in the total WEL score and a change in BMI of R = -0.356 (p = 0.006). Between-group differences in the FACT-G were significant from baseline in the fatigue domain at three months (p = .008) and in the physical domain at six months (p = .048). No other significant differences were found. Conclusion. Overall, this study shows promise for targeted interventions to help improve SE, thus improving BMI. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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