Feasibility and acceptability of a yoga intervention for distress in women with gynecologic, gastrointestinal, or thoracic cancer
| Autor: | Kelsey C. Bacharz, Elizabeth L. Kacel, Grace Ann Hanvey, Adaixa Padron, Sonia Mesa, Merry Jennifer Markham, Irene M. Estores, Frederic J. Kaye, Dennie V. Jones, Deidre B. Pereira |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2022 |
| Předmět: | |
| Zdroj: | Journal of Clinical Oncology. 40:e24125-e24125 |
| ISSN: | 1527-7755 0732-183X |
| Popis: | e24125 Background: Gynecologic, gastrointestinal (GI), and thoracic cancers account for significant morbidity and mortality in the U.S. Women with these types of cancers frequently experience psychological distress, among other poor outcomes. Previous research has indicated that mindfulness-based interventions, such as yoga, can be effective in decreasing distress in cancer patients. Notably, this research has primarily been conducted in a breast cancer population with limited research assessing the feasibility, acceptability, and/or efficacy of this type of intervention in other prevalent and impactful cancers among women. The purpose of the present study was to assess the Feasibility and Acceptability of a yoga intervention for women with gynecologic, GI, or thoracic cancers. Methods: A total of 124 women diagnosed with a gynecologic, GI, or thoracic cancer in the prior year were recruited via outpatient oncology clinics to participate in a 10-week, group-based manualized yoga intervention entitled “Stilling the Waters of Uncertainty” (Author: E. Kacel) that is nearing the end of accrual. Participants completed an Acceptability evaluation following each yoga session with ratings on a 5-point Likert scale from “not at all” to “extremely.” Feasibility of the study was operationalized as percentage of eligible participants who (a) enrolled, (b) attended sessions, and (c) completed post-intervention assessment. Acceptability was operationalized as the percentage of participants with average session ratings of “very” or “extremely” for intervention usefulness, enjoyableness, safety, clarity, relevance, and likelihood of continuing to practice skills. Criteria for operationalizing Feasibility and Acceptability for this study were defined a priori based on recommendations of Bowen and colleagues (2009). A minimum of 80% for each measure of feasibility and acceptability was set as the a priori threshold of success in each domain. Results: All measures of Feasibility were below the a priori benchmark of 80%: Of the 318 eligible patients approached for participation, (a) 124 patients (39.0%) enrolled; 49/124 (39.5%) attended at least 1 yoga session; 44/124 (35.4%) attended at least 8 sessions; and (c) 41/124 (33.1%) completed post-intervention assessment procedures. At least 80% of attendees rated the intervention as “very” or “extremely” useful, enjoyable, safe, and clear; 75.5% and 79.6% of attendees rated the intervention as “very” or “extremely” relevant and likely to be continued to be practiced. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that a yoga intervention for women with prevalent non-breast cancer types did not meet a priori criteria for feasibility. However, participants who attended at least 1 session rated the intervention as generally acceptable. Future research is needed to improve study/intervention feasibility in this population. Clinical trial information: NCT03385577. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|