Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32885221›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2020

Implementing Strength after Breast Cancer (SABC) in outpatient rehabilitation clinics: mapping clinician survey data onto key implementation outcomes.

William A Calo, Shawna E Doerksen, Katherine Spanos, Mackenzi Pergolotti, Kathryn H Schmitz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Studying the implementation of exercise oncology interventions: a path forward.Translational journal of the American College of Sports Medicine · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

William A CaloDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, 500 University Drive, Mail Code CH69, Hershey, PA 17033 USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8452-5063
Shawna E DoerksenDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, 500 University Drive, Mail Code CH69, Hershey, PA 17033 USA.
Katherine SpanosDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, 500 University Drive, Mail Code CH69, Hershey, PA 17033 USA.
Mackenzi PergolottiReVital Cancer Rehabilitation, Select Medical, Mechanicsburg, PA USA.
Kathryn H SchmitzDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, 500 University Drive, Mail Code CH69, Hershey, PA 17033 USA.
Pennsylvania State University · USDartmouth College · USRex Medical (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile 3.5 million breast cancer survivors in the USA are indicative of promising disease-free survival, many experience adverse effects in recovering from treatment. Evidence-based exercise programs may be a low-cost, easily disseminable solution to the challenge of recovering from adverse treatment affects. Therefore, after establishing efficacy in a large randomized controlled trial, we developed the Strength after Breast Cancer (SABC) program and the accompanying online course for clinicians interested in physical therapy to learn to deliver this rehabilitative exercise program to individuals with breast cancer. We surveyed clinicians who took the course to assess implementation of the program in outpatient rehabilitation clinics.

methodsNinety-six clinicians completed the survey between June and December, 2017 (24% response). Guided by Proctor's implementation outcomes framework, the respondents were asked if they had implemented (adoption) and are still implementing the program (sustainability), and which programmatic components they implemented (fidelity). Respondents were asked how many patients completed the program (reach), how patients got into the program (reach), the program's delivery format (appropriateness), and whether clinics were reimbursed by third-party payers (cost). Finally, respondents were asked what barriers they faced in delivery of SABC (feasibility) and whether others in the clinic completed the course (penetration).

resultsSeventy-six percent of respondents implemented SABC and among those, 93% (68/73) were still delivering it. All programmatic components were implemented by over two thirds of respondents (67-95%). On average, the program was delivered to 13 patients per clinic by the time respondents took the survey. Most patient referrals were from oncology clinics (50%). The majority of clinicians delivered SABC one-on-one (96%) and 72% of clinics were compensated via third-party payers. Major barriers were lack of referrals from oncologists (40%) and clinic's competing demands (33%). We found no differences (Fisher's exact test

conclusionOur findings suggest that the online training was sufficient to successfully implement the SABC program in outpatient rehabilitation clinics with high levels of adoption, fidelity, reach, and capacity for sustainability. Information on patient acceptability, cost-effectiveness, and how to overcome implementation barriers are still needed.

Indexed as

Breast cancer survivorEvidence-based guidelinesExerciseImplementation outcomesOncology rehabilitationOnline trainingPhysical therapy

Identifiers

PMID32885221
PMCPMC7427930
OpenAlexW3047169504

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.