A mixed methods process evaluation of a print-based intervention supported by internet tools to improve physical activity in UK cancer survivors
Objective A waiting list randomised control trial has shown the Move More Pack, a print-based intervention supported by Internet tools, to improve physical activity levels in cancer survivors; however, one-third of them do not improve from the intervention. The objective of this process evaluation...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English English English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/5019/9/Move-More-Pack-Process-Evaluation_01_Revised-Manuscript_Clean-version.pdf https://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/5019/10/Move-More-Pack-Process-Evaluation_02_Revised-Figures.pdf https://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/5019/11/Move-More-Pack-Process-Evaluation_03_Revised-Tables.pdf |
| _version_ | 1804072404829339648 |
|---|---|
| author | Webb, Justin Peel, Jenna Fife-Schaw, Chris Ogden, Jane |
| author_facet | Webb, Justin Peel, Jenna Fife-Schaw, Chris Ogden, Jane |
| author_sort | Webb, Justin |
| collection | LMU |
| description | Objective
A waiting list randomised control trial has shown the Move More Pack, a print-based intervention supported by Internet tools, to improve physical activity levels in cancer survivors; however, one-third of them do not improve from the intervention. The objective of this process evaluation is to understand intervention use, the mechanisms of impact, the perceived benefits and the contextual factors influencing these, identifying for whom it is a useful resource.
Methods
The process evaluation used mixed methods, based on guidance from the UK Medical Research Council, including 181 questionnaire responses on intervention use and physical activity improvement over 12 weeks, 56 open-text responses and 17 semistructured interviews.
Results
The Move More Pack was suggested to be most useful when delivered towards the start of the cancer journey to those with a positive attitude to fight cancer but with a low level of physical activity, capitalising on a teachable moment. It was suggested that healthcare professionals could support the effective distribution of the Move More Pack. The intervention's printed components were more popular and well used than the Internet tools. Use of the printed intervention components was positively correlated with physical activity improvement but use of the Internet tools was not. Women were more likely to use the intervention's printed components than men. Cancer survivors using the intervention reflected that they had increased confidence and motivation for physical activity and other lifestyle behaviours.
Conclusion
The Move More Pack should be offered by healthcare professionals, during cancer treatment, when health is salient, to those with a positive attitude to fight cancer but with low levels of physical activity. Use of the intervention's printed components is more likely to improve physical activity than the Internet tools, and the components are more likely to be used by women. The use of Internet tools to support physical activity improvement in cancer survivors requires further investigation. |
| first_indexed | 2024-07-09T03:58:37Z |
| format | Article |
| id | oai:repository.londonmet.ac.uk:5019 |
| institution | London Metropolitan University |
| language | English English English |
| last_indexed | 2024-07-09T03:58:37Z |
| publishDate | 2019 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | eprints |
| spelling | oai:repository.londonmet.ac.uk:50192019-08-02T08:25:56Z http://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/5019/ A mixed methods process evaluation of a print-based intervention supported by internet tools to improve physical activity in UK cancer survivors Webb, Justin Peel, Jenna Fife-Schaw, Chris Ogden, Jane 150 Psychology 360 Social problems & services; associations 610 Medicine & health Objective A waiting list randomised control trial has shown the Move More Pack, a print-based intervention supported by Internet tools, to improve physical activity levels in cancer survivors; however, one-third of them do not improve from the intervention. The objective of this process evaluation is to understand intervention use, the mechanisms of impact, the perceived benefits and the contextual factors influencing these, identifying for whom it is a useful resource. Methods The process evaluation used mixed methods, based on guidance from the UK Medical Research Council, including 181 questionnaire responses on intervention use and physical activity improvement over 12 weeks, 56 open-text responses and 17 semistructured interviews. Results The Move More Pack was suggested to be most useful when delivered towards the start of the cancer journey to those with a positive attitude to fight cancer but with a low level of physical activity, capitalising on a teachable moment. It was suggested that healthcare professionals could support the effective distribution of the Move More Pack. The intervention's printed components were more popular and well used than the Internet tools. Use of the printed intervention components was positively correlated with physical activity improvement but use of the Internet tools was not. Women were more likely to use the intervention's printed components than men. Cancer survivors using the intervention reflected that they had increased confidence and motivation for physical activity and other lifestyle behaviours. Conclusion The Move More Pack should be offered by healthcare professionals, during cancer treatment, when health is salient, to those with a positive attitude to fight cancer but with low levels of physical activity. Use of the intervention's printed components is more likely to improve physical activity than the Internet tools, and the components are more likely to be used by women. The use of Internet tools to support physical activity improvement in cancer survivors requires further investigation. Elsevier 2019-07-30 Article PeerReviewed text en https://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/5019/9/Move-More-Pack-Process-Evaluation_01_Revised-Manuscript_Clean-version.pdf text en https://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/5019/10/Move-More-Pack-Process-Evaluation_02_Revised-Figures.pdf text en https://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/5019/11/Move-More-Pack-Process-Evaluation_03_Revised-Tables.pdf Webb, Justin, Peel, Jenna, Fife-Schaw, Chris and Ogden, Jane (2019) A mixed methods process evaluation of a print-based intervention supported by internet tools to improve physical activity in UK cancer survivors. Public Health, 175. pp. 19-27. ISSN 0033-3506 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033350619302094 10.1016/j.puhe.2019.06.013 |
| spellingShingle | 150 Psychology 360 Social problems & services; associations 610 Medicine & health Webb, Justin Peel, Jenna Fife-Schaw, Chris Ogden, Jane A mixed methods process evaluation of a print-based intervention supported by internet tools to improve physical activity in UK cancer survivors |
| title | A mixed methods process evaluation of a print-based intervention supported by internet tools to improve physical activity in UK cancer survivors |
| title_full | A mixed methods process evaluation of a print-based intervention supported by internet tools to improve physical activity in UK cancer survivors |
| title_fullStr | A mixed methods process evaluation of a print-based intervention supported by internet tools to improve physical activity in UK cancer survivors |
| title_full_unstemmed | A mixed methods process evaluation of a print-based intervention supported by internet tools to improve physical activity in UK cancer survivors |
| title_short | A mixed methods process evaluation of a print-based intervention supported by internet tools to improve physical activity in UK cancer survivors |
| title_sort | mixed methods process evaluation of a print based intervention supported by internet tools to improve physical activity in uk cancer survivors |
| topic | 150 Psychology 360 Social problems & services; associations 610 Medicine & health |
| url | https://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/5019/9/Move-More-Pack-Process-Evaluation_01_Revised-Manuscript_Clean-version.pdf https://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/5019/10/Move-More-Pack-Process-Evaluation_02_Revised-Figures.pdf https://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/5019/11/Move-More-Pack-Process-Evaluation_03_Revised-Tables.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT webbjustin amixedmethodsprocessevaluationofaprintbasedinterventionsupportedbyinternettoolstoimprovephysicalactivityinukcancersurvivors AT peeljenna amixedmethodsprocessevaluationofaprintbasedinterventionsupportedbyinternettoolstoimprovephysicalactivityinukcancersurvivors AT fifeschawchris amixedmethodsprocessevaluationofaprintbasedinterventionsupportedbyinternettoolstoimprovephysicalactivityinukcancersurvivors AT ogdenjane amixedmethodsprocessevaluationofaprintbasedinterventionsupportedbyinternettoolstoimprovephysicalactivityinukcancersurvivors AT webbjustin mixedmethodsprocessevaluationofaprintbasedinterventionsupportedbyinternettoolstoimprovephysicalactivityinukcancersurvivors AT peeljenna mixedmethodsprocessevaluationofaprintbasedinterventionsupportedbyinternettoolstoimprovephysicalactivityinukcancersurvivors AT fifeschawchris mixedmethodsprocessevaluationofaprintbasedinterventionsupportedbyinternettoolstoimprovephysicalactivityinukcancersurvivors AT ogdenjane mixedmethodsprocessevaluationofaprintbasedinterventionsupportedbyinternettoolstoimprovephysicalactivityinukcancersurvivors |