Vegetable Gardening and Health Outcomes in Older Cancer Survivors: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Cancer survivors experience accelerated functional decline that threatens independence and quality of life. Previous studies have suggested that vegetable gardening may improve diet, physical activity, and physical function in this vulnerable population, which comprises more than 5% of the US population. Objective: To assess whether diet, physical activity and functioning, and other outcomes improved in older cancer survivors assigned to a vegetable gardening intervention compared with a waitlist. Design, Setting, and Participants: From May 11, 2016, to May 2, 2022, a 2-arm, assessor-blinded, crossover-designed, intent-to-treat, randomized clinical trial was conducted at cancer survivors' homes across Alabama. Medicare-eligible survivors of cancers with 5-year survival of 60% or more were registry ascertained and screened for suboptimal vegetable and fruit consumption (<5 servings per day), physical activity (<150 moderate-to-vigorous minutes per week), and physical function (36-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36] subscale score ≤90). Consented participants underwent baseline assessments, were randomly assigned to intervention or waitlisted arms, and were reassessed at 1-year follow-up. Intervention: One-year, home-based vegetable gardening intervention providing gardening supplies and mentorship by cooperative extension-certified master gardeners to plant and maintain spring, summer, and fall gardens. Waitlisted participants received the identical intervention after 12 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was a composite index of improvements in self-reported vegetable and fruit consumption, physical activity, and physical function corroborated by plasma α-carotene levels, accelerometry, and physical performance assessments, respectively. Results: Of 381 enrolled participants (mean [SD] age, 69.8 [6.4] years; range, 50-95 years; 263 [69.0%] female), 194 were assigned to the gardening intervention and 187 were waitlisted (attrition rates, 7.2% and 7.0%, respectively). Intent-to-treat analyses did not detect a significant improvement in the composite index of vegetable and fruit intake, moderate-vigorous physical activity, and physical function (intervention arm vs waitlisted arm, 4.5% vs 3.1%; P = .53) or between-arm differences in vegetable and fruit intake (mean difference, 0.3 [95% CI, -0.1 to 0.7] servings per day; P = .10). The intervention arm experienced a significant improvement in vegetable and fruit intake (mean increase, 0.3 [95% CI, 0.0-0.6] servings per day; P = .04). Significant improvements also were observed in the intervention arm vs waitlisted arm in physical performance (mean difference for 2-minute step test, 6.0 [95% CI, 0.8-11.2] steps; P = .03; for 30-second chair stand, 0.8 [95% CI, 0.1-1.5] repetitions; P = .02), perceived health (8.4 [95% CI, 3.0-13.9] points on a 100-point scale [higher scores indicate better health]; P = .003), and gut microbiome alpha diversity (84.1 [95% CI, 20.5-147.6] more observed species; P = .01). The COVID-19 pandemic significantly moderated effects (eg, odds of improvement in self-reported physical functioning were greater before vs during the pandemic: odds ratio, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.12-4.22; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial including older cancer survivors, a vegetable gardening intervention did not significantly improve a composite index of diet, physical activity, and physical function; however, survivors assigned to the intervention had significantly increased vegetable and fruit consumption and, compared with waitlisted survivors, experienced significant improvements in perceived health and physical performance. Further study in broader populations and during pandemic-free periods is needed to determine definitive benefits. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02985411.

Harvest for Health, a Randomized Controlled Trial Testing a Home-Based, Vegetable Gardening Intervention Among Older Cancer Survivors Across Alabama: An Analysis of Accrual and Modifications Made in Intervention Delivery and Assessment During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Accelerated functional decline is a concern among older cancer survivors that threatens independence and quality of life. Pilot studies suggest that vegetable gardening interventions ameliorate functional decline through improved diet and physical activity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article was to describe the rationale, recruitment challenges, and enrollment for the Harvest for Health randomized controlled trial (RCT), which will test the impact of a home-based, vegetable gardening intervention on vegetable and fruit consumption, physical activity, and physical functioning among older cancer survivors. Modifications made to the intervention and assessments to assure safety and continuity of the RCT throughout the COVID-19 pandemic also are reported. DESIGN: Harvest for Health is a 2-year, 2-arm, single-blinded, wait-list controlled RCT with cross-over. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Medicare-eligible survivors of cancers with ≥60% 5-year survival were recruited across Alabama from October 1, 2016 to February 8, 2021. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned to a wait-list control or a 1-year home-based gardening intervention and individually mentored by extension-certified master gardeners to cultivate spring, summer, and fall vegetable gardens. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Although the RCT's primary end point was a composite measure of vegetable and fruit consumption, physical activity, and physical functioning, this article focuses on recruitment and modifications made to the intervention and assessments during COVID-19. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: χ2 and t tests (α < .05) were used to compare enrolled vs unenrolled populations. RESULTS: Older cancer survivors (n = 9,708) were contacted via mail and telephone; 1,460 indicated interest (15% response rate), 473 were screened eligible and consented, and 381 completed baseline assessments and were randomized. Enrollees did not differ from nonrespondents/refusals by race and ethnicity, or rural-urban status, but comprised significantly higher numbers of comparatively younger survivors, those who were female, and survivors of breast cancer (P < .001). Although COVID-19 delayed trial completion, protocol modifications overcame this barrier and study completion is anticipated by June 2022. CONCLUSIONS: This RCT will provide evidence on the effects of a mentored vegetable gardening program among older cancer survivors. If efficacious, Harvest for Health represents a novel, multifaceted approach to improve lifestyle behaviors and health outcomes among cancer survivors-one with capacity for sustainability and widespread dissemination.

A home-based mentored vegetable gardening intervention demonstrates feasibility and improvements in physical activity and performance among breast cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: The current study assessed the feasibility of a mentored home-based vegetable gardening intervention and examined changes in health-related outcomes among breast cancer survivors (BCS). METHODS: BCS were randomized to either a year-long vegetable gardening intervention to begin immediately or a wait-list control. Master Gardeners mentored participants in planning, planting, and maintaining 3 seasonal gardens over the course of 1 year. Participant accrual, retention, and satisfaction rates of ≥80% served as feasibility (primary outcome) benchmarks. Secondary outcomes (ie, vegetable consumption, physical activity, performance and function, anthropometrics, biomarkers, and health-related quality of life) were collected at baseline and post-intervention (1-year follow-up) using subjective and objective measures. RESULTS: The trial surpassed all feasibility benchmarks at 82% of targeted accrual, 95% retention, and 100% satisfaction (ie, experience ratings of "good to excellent" and willingness to "do it again"). Compared with the controls, intervention participants reported significantly greater improvements in moderate physical activity (+14 vs -17 minutes/week) and demonstrated improvements in the 2-Minute Step Test (+22 vs + 10 steps), and Arm Curl (+2.7 vs + 0.1 repetitions) (P values < .05). A trend toward improved vegetable consumption was observed (+0.9 vs + 0.2 servings/day; P = .06). Approximately 86% of participants were continuing to garden at the 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current study suggest that a mentored, home-based vegetable gardening intervention is feasible and offers an integrative and durable approach with which to improve health behaviors and outcomes among BCS. Harvest for Health led to the establishment of a group of trained Master Gardeners and gave rise to local and global community-based programs. Larger studies are needed to confirm the results presented herein and to define applicability across broader populations of survivors.

Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of a Home Vegetable Gardening Intervention among Older Cancer Survivors Shows Feasibility, Satisfaction, and Promise in Improving Vegetable and Fruit Consumption, Reassurance of Worth, and the Trajectory of Central Adiposity.

BACKGROUND: Holistic approaches are sought to improve lifestyle behaviors and health of cancer survivors long term. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to explore whether a home-based vegetable gardening intervention is feasible and whether it improves diet and other health-related outcomes among older cancer survivors. DESIGN: We conducted a feasibility trial in which cancer survivors were randomized to receive a year-long gardening intervention immediately or to a wait-list control arm. Home visits at baseline and 1 year assessed physical performance, anthropometric indices, behavioral and psychosocial outcomes, and biomarkers. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Participants included 46 older (aged 60+ years) survivors of locoregionally staged cancers across Alabama from 2014 to 2016. Forty-two completed 1-year follow-up. INTERVENTION: Cooperative extension master gardeners delivered guidance to establish three seasonal vegetable gardens at survivors' homes. Plants, seeds, and gardening supplies were provided. OUTCOMES: Primary outcomes were feasibility targets of 80% accrual and retention, and an absence of serious adverse events; other outcomes were secondary and explored potential benefits. STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Baseline to follow-up changes were assessed within and between arms using paired t, McNemar's, and χ2 tests. RESULTS: This trial proved to be safe and demonstrated 91.3% retention; 70% of intervention participants rated their experience as "excellent," and 85% would "do it again." Data suggest significantly increased reassurance of worth (+0.49 vs -0.45) and attenuated increases in waist circumference (+2.30 cm vs +7.96 cm) in the gardening vs control arms (P=0.02). Vegetable and fruit consumption increased by approximately 1 serving/day within the gardening arm from baseline to follow-up (mean [standard error]=1.34 [1.2] to 2.25 [1.9] servings/day; P=0.02)] compared to controls (1.22 [1.1] to 1.12 [0.7]; P=0.77; between-arm P=0.06). CONCLUSIONS: The home vegetable gardening intervention among older cancer survivors was feasible and suggested improvements in vegetable and fruit consumption and reassurance of worth; data also suggest attenuated increases in waist circumference. Continued study of vegetable gardening interventions is warranted to improve health, health behaviors, and well-being of older cancer survivors.

Detailed methods of two home-based vegetable gardening intervention trials to improve diet, physical activity, and quality of life in two different populations of cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors suffer from long-term adverse effects that reduce health-related quality of life (QOL) and physical functioning, creating an urgent need to develop effective, durable, and disseminable interventions. Harvest for Health, a home-based vegetable gardening intervention, holds promise for these domains. METHODS: This report describes the methods and recruitment experiences from two randomized controlled feasibility trials that employ a waitlist-controlled design. Delivered in partnership with Cooperative Extension Master Gardeners, this intervention provides one-on-one mentorship of cancer survivors in planning and maintaining three seasonal vegetable gardens over 12months. The primary aim is to determine intervention feasibility and acceptability; secondary aims are to explore effects on objective and subjective measures of diet, physical activity and function, and QOL and examine participant factors associated with potential effects. One trial is conducted exclusively among 82 female breast cancer survivors residing in the Birmingham, AL metropolitan area (BBCS); another broadly throughout Alabama among 46 older cancer survivors aged >60 (ASCS). RESULTS: Response rates were 32.6% (BBCS) and 52.3% (ASCS). Both trials exceeded 80% of their accrual target. Leading reasons for ineligibility were removal of >10 lymph nodes (lymphedema risk factor), lack of physician approval, and unwillingness to be randomized to the waitlist. CONCLUSION: To date, recruitment and implementation of Harvest for Health appears feasible. DISCUSSION: Although both studies encountered recruitment challenges, lessons learned can inform future larger-scale studies. Vegetable gardening interventions are of interest to cancer survivors and may provide opportunities to gain life skills leading to improvements in overall health and QOL.