Search

Background: Structured exercise programs provide considerable health benefits for cancer patients. Therefore, various OnkoAktiv (OA) networks were established in Germany with the aim to connect cancer patients with certified exercise programs. However, knowledge about the integration of exercise networks into cancer care systems and conditions of interorganisational collaboration is lacking. The aim of this work was to analyse the OA networks to guide further network development and implementation work. Methods: We used methods of social network analysis within a cross-sectional study design. Network characteristics were analysed such as node and tie attributes, cohesion and centrality. We classified all networks into their level of organisational form in integrated care. Results: We analysed 11 OA networks with 26 actors and 216 ties on average. The smallest network counted 12 actors/56 ties, the largest 52/530. 76% of all actors operated within the medical/exercise sector, serving 19 different medical professions. In smaller "linkage" networks, several individual professionals were linked "from service to service", whereas the more integrated networks revealed a core-periphery-structure. Discussion: Collaborative networks enable the involvement of professional actors from different operational fields. This study provides an in-depth understanding of underlying organisational structures that provides information for further development of exercise oncology provision. Trial registration: Not applicable, as no health care intervention was performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Germany, a multidisciplinary rehabilitation named "behavioural medical rehabilitation" (BMR) is available for treatment of chronic low back pain (clbp). A central component of BMR is standard exercise therapy (SET), which is directed mainly to improve physical fitness. There is a need to address psychosocial factors within SET and therefore to improve behavior change with a focus on the development of self-management skills in dealing with clbp. Furthermore, short-term effectiveness of BMR with a SET has been proven, but the impact of a behavioural exercise therapy (BET) for improvement of the long-term effectiveness of BMR is unclear. Methods/design: To compare the effectiveness of two exercise programs with different approaches within BMR on the effects of BMR a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) in two rehabilitation centres will be performed. 214 patients aged 18-65 with clbp will be, based on an "urn randomisation"-algorithm, randomly assigned to a BMR with SET (function-oriented, n=107) and BMR with BET (behaviour-oriented, n=107). Both exercise programs have a mean duration of 26 hours in three weeks and are delivered by a limited number of not-blinded study therapists in closed groups with six to twelve patients who will be masked regarding study group. The main differences of BET lie in its detailed manualised program with a theory-based, goal-orientated combination of exercise, education and behavioural elements, active participation of patients and consideration of their individual preferences and previous experiences with exercise. The primary outcome is functional ability assessed with the Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire directly before and after the rehabilitation program, as well as a six and twelve-month follow-up. Discussion: This RCT is designed to explore the effects of BET on the effectiveness of a BMR compared to a BMR with SET in the management of patients with clbp. Methodological challenges arise from conducting a RCT within routine health care as well as from ensuring high treatment integrity. Findings of this study might contribute to a better understanding of the mechanism of action of BMR and the special effects of BET and may be used to improve the quality of these interventions in routine care, therefore reducing the burden to patients with disabling clbp. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The long-term effects of behavioural medical rehabilitation (BMR), as a type of multidisciplinary rehabilitation, in the treatment of chronic non-specific low back pain (CLBP) have been shown. However, the specific effects of behavioural exercise therapy (BET) compared to standard exercise therapy (SET) within BMR are not well understood. The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of BMR + BET compared to BMR + SET in individuals with CLBP in a two-armed, pre-registered, multicentre, parallel, randomised controlled trial (RCT).Methods: A total of 351 adults with CLBP in two rehabilitation centres were online randomised based on an 'urn randomisation' algorithm to either BMR + SET (n = 175) or BMR + BET (n = 176). Participants in both study groups were non-blinded and received BMR, consisting of an multidisciplinary admission, a psychosocial assessment, multidisciplinary case management, psychological treatment, health education and social counselling. The intervention group (BMR + BET) received a manualised, biopsychosocial BET within BMR. The aim of BET was to develop self-management strategies in coping with CLBP. The control group (BMR + SET) received biomedical SET within BMR with the aim to improve mainly physical fitness. Therapists in both study groups were not blinded. The BMR lasted on average 27 days, and both exercise programmes had a mean duration of 26 h. The primary outcome was functional ability at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were e.g. pain, avoidance-endurance, pain management and physical activity. The analysis was by intention-to-treat, blinded to the study group, and used a linear mixed model.Results: There were no between-group differences observed in function at the end of the BMR (mean difference, 0.08; 95% CI - 2.82 to 2.99; p = 0.955), at 6 months (mean difference, - 1.80; 95% CI; - 5.57 to 1.97; p = 0.349) and at 12 months (mean difference, - 1.33; 95% CI - 5.57 to 2.92; p = 0.540). Both study groups improved in the primary outcome and most secondary outcomes at 12 months with small to medium effect sizes.Conclusion: BMR + BET was not more effective in improving function and other secondary outcomes in individuals with CLBP compared to BMR + SET.Trial Registration: Current controlled trials NCT01666639 , 16/08/2012. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evidence suggests that patients suffering from different mental disorders benefit from exercise programs combined with behavior change techniques. Based on this evidence, we have developed an exercise program (ImPuls) specifically designed to provide an additional treatment option in the outpatient mental health care system. The implementation of such complex programs into the outpatient context requires research that goes beyond the evaluation of effectiveness, and includes process evaluation. So far, process evaluation related to exercise interventions has rarely been conducted. As part of a current pragmatic randomized controlled trial evaluating ImPuls treatment effects, we are therefore carrying out comprehensive process evaluation according to the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework. The central aim of our process evaluation is to support the findings of the ongoing randomized controlled trial. Methods: The process evaluation follows a mixed-methods approach. We collect quantitative data via online-questionnaires from patients, exercise therapists, referring healthcare professionals and managers of outpatient rehabilitative and medical care facilities before, during, and after the intervention. In addition, documentation data as well as data from the ImPuls smartphone application are collected. Quantitative data is complemented by qualitative interviews with exercise therapists as well as a focus-group interview with managers. Treatment fidelity will be assessed through the rating of video-recorded sessions. Quantitative data analysis includes descriptive as well as mediation and moderation analyses. Qualitative data will be analyzed via qualitative content analysis. Discussion: The results of our process evaluation will complement the evaluation of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness and will, for example, provide important information about mechanisms of impact, structural prerequisites, or provider qualification that may support the decision-making process of health policy stakeholders. It might contribute to paving the way for exercise programs like ImPuls to be made successively available for patients with heterogeneous mental disorders in the German outpatient mental health care system. Trial registration: The parent clinical study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (ID: DRKS00024152, registered 05/02/2021, https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00024152). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Germany, a multidisciplinary rehabilitation named "behavioural medical rehabilitation" (BMR) is available for treatment of chronic low back pain (clbp). A central component of BMR is standard exercise therapy (SET), which is directed mainly to improve physical fitness. There is a need to address psychosocial factors within SET and therefore to improve behavior change with a focus on the development of self-management skills in dealing with clbp. Furthermore, short-term effectiveness of BMR with a SET has been proven, but the impact of a behavioural exercise therapy (BET) for improvement of the long-term effectiveness of BMR is unclear.Methods/design: To compare the effectiveness of two exercise programs with different approaches within BMR on the effects of BMR a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) in two rehabilitation centres will be performed. 214 patients aged 18-65 with clbp will be, based on an "urn randomisation"-algorithm, randomly assigned to a BMR with SET (function-oriented, n=107) and BMR with BET (behaviour-oriented, n=107). Both exercise programs have a mean duration of 26 hours in three weeks and are delivered by a limited number of not-blinded study therapists in closed groups with six to twelve patients who will be masked regarding study group. The main differences of BET lie in its detailed manualised program with a theory-based, goal-orientated combination of exercise, education and behavioural elements, active participation of patients and consideration of their individual preferences and previous experiences with exercise. The primary outcome is functional ability assessed with the Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire directly before and after the rehabilitation program, as well as a six and twelve-month follow-up.Discussion: This RCT is designed to explore the effects of BET on the effectiveness of a BMR compared to a BMR with SET in the management of patients with clbp. Methodological challenges arise from conducting a RCT within routine health care as well as from ensuring high treatment integrity. Findings of this study might contribute to a better understanding of the mechanism of action of BMR and the special effects of BET and may be used to improve the quality of these interventions in routine care, therefore reducing the burden to patients with disabling clbp.Trial Registration: Current controlled trials NCT01666639. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mental disorders are prevalent and cause considerable burden of disease. Exercise has been shown to be efficacious to treat major depressive disorders, insomnia, panic disorder with and without agoraphobia and post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Methods: This pragmatic, two arm, multi-site randomised controlled trial will evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the manualized, group-based six-months exercise intervention "ImPuls", among physically inactive patients with major depressive disorders, insomnia, panic disorder, agoraphobia and PTSD within a naturalistic outpatient context in Germany. A minimum of 375 eligible outpatients from 10 different study sites will be block-randomized to either ImPuls in addition to treatment as usual (TAU) or TAU only. ImPuls will be conducted by trained exercise therapists and delivered in groups of six patients. The program will combine (a) moderate to vigorous aerobic exercise carried out two-three times a week for at least 30 min with (b) behavior change techniques for sustained exercise behavior change. All outcomes will be assessed pre-treatment, post-treatment (six months after randomization) and at follow-up (12 months after randomization). Primary outcome will be self-reported global symptom severity assessed with the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI-18). Secondary outcomes will be accelerometry-based moderate to vigorous physical activity, self-reported exercise, disorder-specific symptoms, quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and healthcare costs. Intention-to-treat analyses will be conducted using mixed models. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis will be conducted using incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios. Discussion: Despite its promising therapeutic effects, exercise programs are currently not provided within the outpatient mental health care system in Germany. This trial will inform service providers and policy makers about the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the group-based exercise intervention ImPuls within a naturalistic outpatient health care setting. Group-based exercise interventions might provide an option to close the treatment gap within outpatient mental health care settings. Trial registration: The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (ID: DRKS00024152, 05/02/2021). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]