ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common female malignancy worldwide and a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Exercise during adjuvant treatment improves function and relieves symptoms in breast cancer survivors. However, it is unclear if an unsupervised exercise programme may be as effective as a supervised multimodal group. We investigated the feasibility and efficacy of a centre-based multidimensional rehabilitation (MDR) programme for breast cancer survivors undergoing adjuvant treatment and compared it to an unsupervised home-based exercise (HE) programme. METHODS: Participants were self-allocated to either MDR or HE group. MDR participants underwent 24 supervised exercise classes and 10 education classes over 12 weeks. HE participants were instructed on a home exercise regime. Outcome measures, including the 6-min walk test (6MWT) and Frenchay Activities Index (FAI), FACT-Cognitive Function scale, and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30, were conducted at baseline (W0), post-intervention (W12) and 6-months post-intervention (M6). Variance between time points and the 2 groups were analysed using a linear mixed model (unstructured covariance matrix) and adjusted with Bonferroni. RESULT: Twenty-five participants attended at least half of the MDR interventions, while 21 completed the HE interventions. The former showed significant improvement in 6MWT, from 406.88 m (W0) to 443.34 m (W12) to 452.81 m (M6), while the improvement in the HE group was not significant (407.67 m (W0) to 433.14 m (W12) to 430.96 m (M6)). Both groups showed a significant improvement in FAI, with earlier significant improvement noted at W12 in the MDR group (22.71 (W0) to 27.65 (W12) to 28.81 (M6)) compared to the HE group (23.16 (W0) to 26.47 (W12) to 29.85 (M6)). Dropout rate was 16% in the MDR group and 34% in HE group. Overall satisfaction with the MDR programme was high. CONCLUSION: Both MDR and HE programmes were feasible. MDR was superior in improving endurance and earlier return to instrumental activities for those who completed at least half of the sessions. Future studies could explore use of technology to improve adherence to exercise. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with ClinicalTrial.gov on 01/04/2022 with the registration number NCT05306808.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Quality of Life , Sulfonamides , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Exercise Therapy , ExerciseABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Despite the availability of cancer rehabilitation, utilization at our institution was low. We designed the Cancer Rehabilitation Questionnaire (CRQ) to investigate the prevalence of functional impairments amongst cancer survivors and attitudes towards rehabilitation participation. We evaluated the performance of CRQ as a screening tool for detecting clinically important physical dysfunction. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was performed, recruiting cancer survivors at a university outpatient oncology clinic. Cancer survivors completed the CRQ and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire - Core 30 Questionnaires. Descriptive statistical analysis and receiver operator characteristics analysis were performed to assess the ability of the CRQ to detect clinically important physical dysfunction, as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30. RESULTS: Of 204 participants, 87.3% reported impairments in at least 1 CRQ domain. Pain and weakness were most common. The number of positive items correlated with EORTC global health status and functional scales. A cut-off of ≥ 4 on the CRQ predicted clinically important physical dysfunction (sensitivity 61.8%, specificity 75.5%). Of those with impairments, 53.9% were unwilling to participate in rehabilitation. Transportation, need for caregivers, and cost were the main barriers. CONCLUSION: Our findings will guide resource allocation to overcome barriers to participation. The CRQ can help to stratify cancer survivors requiring further rehabilitation interventions.
