AAC Evaluation

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Evaluation of the Yorkshire Cancer Research & Harrogate & District NHS Foundation Trust Active Against Cancer Service

  • IRAS ID

    271175

  • Contact name

    Anna Myers

  • Contact email

    a.myers@shu.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    1 years, 4 months, 31 days

  • Research summary

    Strong evidence exists supporting the efficacy of exercise as an adjunct to cancer treatment. Despite the evidence supporting the inclusion of exercise before, during and after cancer treatment it is not part of standard NHS care. Furthermore, the effectiveness of pragmatic community-based exercise interventions that are embedded within cancer care pathways has received little attention. The aim of this study is to evaluate the Active Against Cancer service which aims to create a unique, high quality health and wellbeing service for people living with cancer in Harrogate, with exercise at its core. The service will promote the benefits of physical activity and healthy living, offer tailored exercise prescription and embed exercise referral into clinical pathways.

    Primary objectives
    This study will explore the effect of the AAC service on:
    1. Physical and clinical outcomes (i.e. length of stay, aerobic capacity and muscle strength).
    2. Psychological and behavioural outcomes (i.e. quality of life, fatigue and physical activity levels).
    3. Economic outcomes (i.e. cost-effectiveness and quality-adjusted life years).

    Secondary objectives
    A process evaluation will also be conducted exploring the feasibility and acceptability of the AAC service for patients, delivery staff and wider stakeholders. The process evaluation will consider the content, context, implementation, and mechanisms that contribute to beneficial effects (or otherwise) of specific interventions and the service as a whole. A systematic process evaluation will elucidate the feasibility, acceptability, and generalizability of the intervention, and help refine its design and implementation for future roll-out.

  • REC name

    Yorkshire & The Humber - Sheffield Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    20/YH/0006

  • Date of REC Opinion

    17 Mar 2020

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion