A meta-analysis of healthy lifestyle interventions addressing quality of life of cancer survivors in the post treatment phase.
5 Repeated evidence
- Type of study
- meta-analysis or systematic review
- Studied in
- people
- Participants
- not stated in the abstract
- Published
- 2025 in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice
- Cited
- 11 times by other research
- Who paid
- Not declared. PubMed carries no conflict-of-interest statement for most articles; that is not the same as independent.
- Source
- PubMed 38206430 · doi 10.1007/s11764-023-01514-x
PURPOSE: This study's primary aim was to investigate whether including a mental health component to healthy lifestyle interventions are associated with greater effects on quality of life (QoL) for post-treatment cancer survivors than addressing physical activity and/or nutrition alone. METHODS: PsycINFO, Scopus, Medline, CINAHL, and Google Scholar were searched to identify randomised control trials of healthy lifestyle interventions for post-treatment cancer survivors, with a usual care or waitlist control, and measured QoL. Meta-analyses quantified the effects of interventions vs controls at post-treatment on total QoL, physical, emotional, and social well-being. Subgroup analyses compared interventions with vs without a mental health component, modes of delivery, and duration. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2. RESULTS: Eighty-eight papers evaluating 110 interventions were included: 66 effect sizes were extracted for meta-analysis, and 22 papers were narratively synthesised. The pooled effect size demonstrated a small, significant effect of healthy lifestyle interventions in comparison to control for all QoL outcomes (total g = 0.32, p >.001; physical g = 0.19, p = 0.05; emotional g = 0.20, p >.001; social g = 0.18, p = 0.01). There was no significant difference between interventions with vs without a mental health component. Face-to-face delivered interventions were associated with greater total QoL and physical well-being compared to other modalities. Interventions delivered ≤12 weeks were associated with greater physical well-being than those delivered ≥13 weeks. Overall, studies had substantial levels of heterogeneity and 55.9% demonstrated high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Participating in a healthy lifestyle intervention following cancer treatment improves QoL. Few trials addressed mental health or evaluated online or telephone modalities; future research should develop and evaluate interventions that utilise these features. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Brief healthy lifestyle interventions can be recommended for cancer survivors, particularly those interested in improving physical well-being.