IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i6p3327-d522901.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Mixed-Methods Evaluation of CARE (Cancer and Rehabilitation Exercise): A Physical Activity and Health Intervention, Delivered in a Community Football Trust

Author

Listed:
  • Zoe Rutherford

    (School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4006, Australia
    Policy and Epidemiology Group, Queensland Centre for Mental Health Research, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia)

  • Stephen Zwolinsky

    (West Yorkshire & Harrogate Cancer Alliance, White Rose House, West Parade, Wakefield WF1 1LT, UK)

  • Nicky Kime

    (Bradford Institute for Health Research, Temple Bank House, Bradford Royal Infirmary, Bradford BD9 6RJ, UK)

  • Andy Pringle

    (Department of Sport, Outdoor and Exercise Science, School of Human Sciences & Human Sciences Research Centre, University of Derby, Kedleston Road, Derby DE22 1GB, UK)

Abstract

With increasing cancer survivorship has come an increased necessity to support people living with cancer (PLWC) to have a good quality of life including being physically active. Using mixed methods, the current study aimed to use the RE-AIM evaluation framework (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance) to determine how the football community trust delivered CARE (Cancer and Rehabilitation Exercise) intervention was able to increase participants’ physical activity in order to improve their quality of life and regain physiological and psychological function. Quantitative outcome data were collected at baseline, 3 and 6 months using the Cancer Physical Activity Standard Evaluation Framework questionnaire. Semi-structured focus groups ( n = 5) captured participants’ ( n = 40) lived experience of the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance of CARE. Questionnaire data were analysed using repeated measures ANOVAs and qualitative data were thematically analysed. Following diagnosis, CARE was successful in providing participants with a unique and accessible opportunity to become or restart physically activity, by providing a local, socially supportive, and inclusive environment. This resulted in significant increases in physical activity ( F (1.58, 23) = 5.98, p = 0.009), quality of life (QoL) ( F (2,36) = 13.12, p = 0.000) and significant reductions in fatigue ( F (1.57,31) = 11.19, p = 0.000) over 6 months. Participants also reported becoming more active, recovering physical function, regaining independence, and enhanced psychological well-being as a result of attending CARE. Key design features of CARE were also identified across RE-AIM. CARE, a football community trust delivered physical activity intervention was successful in significantly improving participants’ QoL and in regaining the physical and psychological functioning of people living with cancer. Results suggest that maintaining engagement in CARE for 6 months and beyond can support people to maintain these changes. Engaging in robust evaluations such as this can help organizations to successfully secure future funding for their programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Zoe Rutherford & Stephen Zwolinsky & Nicky Kime & Andy Pringle, 2021. "A Mixed-Methods Evaluation of CARE (Cancer and Rehabilitation Exercise): A Physical Activity and Health Intervention, Delivered in a Community Football Trust," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-27, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:6:p:3327-:d:522901
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/6/3327/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/6/3327/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Glasgow, R.E. & Vogt, T.M. & Boles, S.M., 1999. "Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: The RE-AIM framework," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 89(9), pages 1322-1327.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andy Pringle & Nicky Kime & Stephen Zwolinsky & Zoe Rutherford & Clare M. P. Roscoe, 2022. "An Investigation into the Physical Activity Experiences of People Living with and beyond Cancer during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-20, March.
    2. Clare M. P. Roscoe & Andy Pringle & Charlotte Chandler & Mark A. Faghy & Ben Barratt, 2022. "The Role of Physical Activity in Cancer Recovery: An Exercise Practitioner’s Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-15, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jungyoon Kim & Valerie Pacino & Hongmei Wang & April Recher & Isha Jain & Vaibhavi Mone & Jihyun Ma & Mary Jo Spurgin & Daniel Jeffrey & Stephen Mohring & Jane Potter, 2021. "System Redesign: The Value of a Primary Care Liaison Model to Address Unmet Social Needs among Older Primary Care Patients," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-11, October.
    2. Gonot-Schoupinsky, Freda N. & Garip, Gulcan, 2019. "A flexible framework for planning and evaluating early-stage health interventions: FRAME-IT," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    3. Chelsea M. Cooper & Mary Drake & Justine A. Kavle & Joyce Nyoni & Ruth Lemwayi & Lemmy Mabuga & Anne Pfitzer & Mary Makungu & Elizabeth Massawe & John George, 2021. "Implementing a Novel Facility-Community Intervention for Strengthening Integration of Infant Nutrition and Family Planning in Mara and Kagera, Tanzania," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-21, April.
    4. Francisco Javier de la Garza Iga & Marinés Mejía Alvarez & Joshua D Cockroft & Julia Rabin & Ana Cordón & Dina Maria Elias Rodas & Maria del Pilar Grazioso & Maria Espinola & Christine O’Dea & Ch, 2023. "Using the project ECHO™ model to teach mental health topics in rural Guatemala: An implementation science-guided evaluation," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 69(8), pages 2031-2041, December.
    5. Eugenio Zucchelli & Andrew M Jones & Nigel Rice, 2012. "The evaluation of health policies through dynamic microsimulation methods," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 5(1), pages 2-20.
    6. Gabrielle Scronce & Wanqing Zhang & Matthew Lee Smith & Vicki Stemmons Mercer, 2020. "Characteristics Associated with Improved Physical Performance among Community-Dwelling Older Adults in a Community-Based Falls Prevention Program," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-12, April.
    7. Saria Hassan & Alexis Cooke & Haneefa Saleem & Dorothy Mushi & Jessie Mbwambo & Barrot H. Lambdin, 2019. "Evaluating the Integrated Methadone and Anti-Retroviral Therapy Strategy in Tanzania Using the RE-AIM Framework," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-15, February.
    8. Julie Cowie & Eileen Calveley & Gillian Bowers & John Bowers, 2018. "Evaluation of a Digital Consultation and Self-Care Advice Tool in Primary Care: A Multi-Methods Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-23, May.
    9. Melissa D. Olfert & Rebecca L. Hagedorn & Makenzie L. Barr & Oluremi A. Famodu & Jessica M. Rubino & Jade A. White, 2018. "eB4CAST: An Evidence-Based Tool to Promote Dissemination and Implementation in Community-Based, Public Health Research," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-13, September.
    10. Sebastian-Ion Ceptureanu & Eduard-Gabriel Ceptureanu & Mihai Cristian Orzan & Irinel Marin, 2017. "Toward a Romanian NPOs Sustainability Model: Determinants of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-26, June.
    11. Michelle Nichols & Ronald Teufel & Sarah Miller & Mohan Madisetti & Christine San Giovanni & Katherine Chike-Harris & Lacy Jones & Margaret Prentice & Kenneth Ruggiero & Teresa Kelechi, 2020. "Managing Asthma and Obesity Related Symptoms (MATADORS): An mHealth Intervention to Facilitate Symptom Self-Management among Youth," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-15, October.
    12. Natalie Bradford & Shirley Chambers & Adrienne Hudson & Jacqui Jauncey‐Cooke & Robyn Penny & Carol Windsor & Patsy Yates, 2019. "Evaluation frameworks in health services: An integrative review of use, attributes and elements," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(13-14), pages 2486-2498, July.
    13. Seonad K. Madden & Helen Skouteris & Cate Bailey & Andrew P. Hills & Kiran D. K. Ahuja & Briony Hill, 2020. "Women in the Workplace: Promoting Healthy Lifestyles and Mitigating Weight Gain during the Preconception, Pregnancy, and Postpartum Periods," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-7, January.
    14. Kristen C. Reilly & Patricia Tucker & Jennifer D. Irwin & Andrew M. Johnson & Erin S. Pearson & Dirk E. Bock & Shauna M. Burke, 2018. "“C.H.A.M.P. Families”: Description and Theoretical Foundations of a Paediatric Overweight and Obesity Intervention Targeting Parents—A Single-Centre Non-Randomised Feasibility Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-23, December.
    15. Benjamin L. Robinson & Mike J. Clifford & Sarah Jewitt, 2021. "TIME to Change: An Evaluation of Practical Action Nepal’s Results Based Finance Program," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, May.
    16. Floor A. van den Brand & Tessa Magnée & Lotte de Haan-Bouma & Cas Barendregt & Niels H. Chavannes & Onno C. P. van Schayck & Gera E. Nagelhout, 2019. "Implementation of Financial Incentives for Successful Smoking Cessation in Real-Life Company Settings: A Qualitative Needs Assessment among Employers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-16, December.
    17. Prosser, Brenton & Clark, Shannon & Davey, Rachel & Parker, Rhian, 2013. "Developing a public health policy-research nexus: An evaluation of Nurse Practitioner models in aged care," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 55-63.
    18. Currie, Melissa & King, Gillian & Rosenbaum, Peter & Law, Mary & Kertoy, Marilyn & Specht, Jacqueline, 2005. "A model of impacts of research partnerships in health and social services," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 400-412, November.
    19. Guzmán, Azucena & Orellana, Katharine & Ortega, Mariana López & Robledo, Luis Miguel Gutiérrez & Castro, Sara Torres, 2024. "Introducing a multicomponent staff training intervention to reduce antipsychotic medication: Care home management pre and post intervention views of systemic impact, and preliminary RE-AIM evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    20. Holly Blake & Betsy Lai & Emil Coman & Jonathan Houdmont & Amanda Griffiths, 2019. "Move-It: A Cluster-Randomised Digital Worksite Exercise Intervention in China: Outcome and Process Evaluation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-23, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:6:p:3327-:d:522901. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.