ABSTRACT
Background: Regular exercise can mitigate the loss of strength, balance, and flexibility that contribute to age-related decline in physical function and mobility. However, traditional exercise interventions often report poor adherence rates. There is growing interest in classical ballet as an enjoyable exercise modality for adults in middle to late age. Classical ballet requires muscular strength, coordination, and flexibility. The current study investigated a classical ballet intervention on the balance, physical function, and range of motion of women aged over 50 years. Methods: Twenty-two healthy female participants (aged 56.2 (4.5) years (mean (SD)) completed a 10-week ballet intervention. Results: This single-arm study showed significant improvements (p<.05) in lower limb strength (measured by 5 times sit-to-stand and forward leap) and high adherence rates (95% adherence for participants who completed the intervention). No adverse events were reported. Improvements in balance were reported in the left leg only (as measured by center of pressure ellipse area in the parallel retiré condition). Conclusions: These results allude to the positive effects of ballet training on strength and balance in adults aged 50 years and over. High adherence rates suggest that ballet training was enjoyed and may thus be a long-term exercise modality for this population. Although this study was a single-arm design, it suggests promising results for future research wishing to evaluate the effectiveness of classical ballet training using randomized controlled trial designs.
Subject(s)
Dancing , Adult , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Exercise , Leg , Lower Extremity , Range of Motion, ArticularABSTRACT
The aim of this systematic rapid review was to explore barriers, facilitators, perceptions and preferences of physical activity for people diagnosed with cancer, by cancer type and treatment stage. The search strategy, implemented through four databases, included terms relating to cancer, physical activity, barriers, facilitators, perceptions and preferences, and relevant study designs. Studies reporting the outcomes of interests for adults diagnosed with cancer and living in Western countries were included and grouped according to the Social-Ecological Model and the Health Belief Model, and pragmatically. A total of 118 studies, involving 15 cancers were included. Outcomes were most commonly explored within samples involving mixed cancers (32 studies) and breast cancer (31 studies), and at the post-treatment phase (52 studies). Across all cancers and during- and post-treatment, treatment- and disease-related side-effects were the most commonly identified barrier, social support and guidance was the most commonly identified facilitator, and promoting health and recovery was the most commonly identified perception of benefit of physical activity. Notable differences were identified in barriers, facilitators and perceptions across cancer types and treatment stages, with specific examples including: comorbidities were inconsistently reported as a barrier across cancers; time pressure was more commonly reported as a barrier post-treatment; and women with breast cancer reported inaccessibility of appropriate services more commonly during-treatment than post-treatment. Preference findings varied widely across cancer types and treatment phases. These findings can be used to aid efforts to improve physical activity levels post-cancer by providing healthcare professionals with information to facilitate individualised advice and services.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Improvements in breast cancer management continue to increase survival and life expectancy after treatment. Yet the adverse effects of treatment may persist long term, threatening physical, psychological, and social wellbeing, leading to impaired quality of life (QOL). Upper-body morbidity (UBM) such as pain, lymphoedema, restricted shoulder range of motion (ROM), and impaired function are widely reported after breast cancer treatment, but evidence demonstrating its impact on QOL is inconsistent. Therefore, the aim of the study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the effect of UBM on QOL following primary breast cancer treatment. METHODS: The study was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020203445). CINAHL, Embase, Emcare, PsycInfo, PubMed/Medline, and SPORTDiscus databases were searched for studies reporting QOL in individuals with and without UBM following primary breast cancer treatment. Primary analysis determined the standardised mean difference (SMD) in physical, psychological, and social wellbeing scores between UBM + /UBM - groups. Secondary analyses identified differences in QOL scores between groups, according to questionnaire. RESULTS: Fifty-eight studies were included, with 39 conducive to meta-analysis. Types of UBM included pain, lymphoedema, restricted shoulder ROM, impaired upper-body function, and upper-body symptoms. UBM + groups reported poorer physical (SMD = - 0.99; 95%CI = - 1.26, - 0.71; p < 0.00001), psychological (SMD = - 0.43; 95%CI = - 0.60, - 0.27; p < 0.00001), and social wellbeing (SMD = - 0.62; 95%CI = - 0.83, - 0.40; p < 0.00001) than UBM - groups. Secondary analyses according to questionnaire showed that UBM + groups rated their QOL poorer or at equal to, UBM - groups across all domains. CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrate the significant, negative impact of UBM on QOL, pervading physical, psychological, and social domains. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Efforts to assess and minimise the multidimensional impact of UBM are warranted to mitigate impaired QOL after breast cancer.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The "Ballet after breast cancer" study sought to investigate the feasibility and acceptability of a 16-week classical ballet intervention for breast cancer survivors, delivered face-to-face and/or online. METHODS: Breast cancer survivors were recruited to take part in 2 × 1-h ballet classes per week for 16 weeks. Primary outcomes of feasibility and acceptability were assessed according to rates of enrolment and attendance and participant feedback via questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included quality of life (QOL), upper-body disability, shoulder range of motion (ROM), muscular strength, aerobic capacity, and physical activity levels. Associations between rate of attendance and changes in secondary measures were explored. RESULTS: Thirty-one participants (62% of eligible individuals) enrolled in the program. Twenty-nine women commenced the intervention [53.3 ± 10.8 years (Mean ± SD)], attending 77.6% [67.6, 87.5] (Mean [95% CI]) of sessions. Based on these rates of enrolment and attendance, and participant feedback, the program was deemed feasible and acceptable to participants. Significant improvements in shoulder ROM and reductions in sedentary behaviour were achieved. Participants also reported improvements in physical capacity and psychological, social, and cognitive wellbeing. CONCLUSIONS: The "Ballet after breast cancer" program, delivered face-to-face and/or online, was feasible and acceptable to breast cancer survivors. Improvements in shoulder ROM achieved doing ballet were pertinent given the adverse effects of upper-body morbidity on breast cancer survivor QOL. Improvements in physical activity behaviour and perceived benefits to wellbeing also support the use of ballet to mitigate QOL impairment after treatment. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: The physical demands and the fun, creative, and social characteristics of ballet promote improvement across multiple domains of health and wellbeing. Ballet shows promise as an activity to improve QOL and increase long-term engagement in health-promoting physical activity after breast cancer.
