Skip to content

The Breast Cancer Online Rehabilitation Program

The Breast Cancer Online Rehabilitation Program: A Feasibility Study of Individually Tailored Online Rehabilitation After Breast Cancer Surgery The Copenhagen BRECOR Program

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02673918
Acronym
BRECOR
Enrollment
59
Registered
2016-02-04
Start date
2016-02-29
Completion date
2017-06-30
Last updated
2019-12-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Breast Cancer

Keywords

Rehabilitation, Home-Based Intervention

Brief summary

The investigators have developed an online rehabilitation platform to guide women in their home-based upper-body exercises after breast cancer surgery. The platform includes rehabilitation videos that will guide the women in performing home-based early post-surgery upper-body rehabilitation tailored for each individual. The primary objective is to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a home-based rehabilitation program supported by a supplemental online platform for women after breast cancer surgery before conducting a larger pragmatic trial in the future. The feasibility of the platform will be tested in 11 municipalities in Denmark.

Detailed description

More and more women are being diagnosed with breast cancer worldwide. While a vast majority will survive their disease, adverse treatment effects are common, and may persist beyond the treatment period and contribute to the burden of cancer. After surviving breast cancer, women often struggle with upper-body side effects from the cancer treatment such as tight scar tissue, arm swelling, decreased shoulder function. This limits the woman's physical well-being, affects her ability to take care of her family, return to work, and ultimately impacts her quality of life. Specific upper-body rehabilitation exercises and participation in general exercise have been shown to prevent, attenuate or rehabilitate many of the physical and psychosocial side effects of breast cancer treatment. New ways of delivering rehabilitation are needed to ensure continued capacity to undertake the growing demand for cancer rehabilitation. There is currently great diversity in the quality and access to cancer rehabilitation. Equal access to evidence-based, homogeneous, and high-quality rehabilitation is needed independent of geographical area of residence and setting of rehabilitation (municipality or hospital). Online rehabilitation integrated in the current survivorship rehabilitation programs offers the opportunity to deliver this homogeneous intervention across the country. At this time, little effort has been made to develop online rehabilitation platforms for breast cancer survivors, thus no evidence to support the expected benefits of online rehabilitation is available. Study objective: The study aims to test if the platform is feasible and acceptable for women who have received treatment for breast cancer. The hypothesis is that the support of filmed accessible upper-body rehabilitation exercises through a website will promote improved adherence and motivation to do the home-based exercises illustrated by ≥75% of participants will perform the home-based program 5-7 times weekly and ≥ 75% of participants report to be somewhat or very satisfied with the intervention. Study design: This study will test the feasibility of the intervention among two groups of participants: Part 1 will recruit women newly operated for breast cancer; Part 2 will recruit women who have completed radiation therapy for breast cancer. Both groups will receive the same intervention and the same information will be captured from all enrolled participants on retention, adherence, and acceptability of the intervention being tested. Outcomes related to the feasibility of the intervention will be collected before and following the 12-week intervention. Using the PICOT format the trial parameters are: Population: Women who underwent surgery for breast cancer within the last 8 weeks (part 1) and women who have had surgery and have completed radiation therapy for breast cancer within the past 6 weeks (part 2). Intervention: Participants will get a leaflet with upper-body rehabilitation exercises and have access to an online rehabilitation platform for the 12-week study period. The platform is a website with videos of upper body rehabilitation exercises, mindfulness sessions and instruction in lymphatic drainage combined with additional information about prevention and early detection of late effects after breast cancer treatment. The intervention will be tailored to each woman with specific upper body exercises based on the baseline arm assessment. The physiotherapist will deliver a leaflet with exercises and educational information to support the engagement in home-based exercises. In addition to this intervention, all participants will be offered the existing rehabilitation program in the trial sites. The programs differ from site to site, but generally include post-surgery upper-body rehabilitation group sessions, general whole body aerobic and resistance training and individual treatment and instruction by a physiotherapist if issues are noted during the group sessions. Comparison: For this feasibility study, no control group will be used. Outcome: Outcomes are recruitment rate, adherence and retention, participant satisfaction, capacity/resources and response-rate to the questionnaires concerning intention, attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control to do home-based exercises, and shoulder function. Time of intervention: Participants in part 1 will be recruited up to eight weeks after breast cancer surgery, when they start the municipal rehabilitation, and after inclusion followed for 12 weeks. Participants in part 2 will be recruited when the have completed radiation therapy for breast cancer, and after inclusion followed for 12 weeks. Study conduct: This study has obtained ethical approval from the Danish National Committee on Health Research Ethics, the Danish Data Protection Agency and has been submitted for ethical approval for the University of British Columbia Clinical Research Ethics Board. The study will be conducted in accordance with the protocol and the Helsinki Declaration. All study participants will sign an informed consent form prior to beginning the study. Participants: All patients who have received surgery for breast cancer at the identified clinical sites, and meet the eligibility criteria will be approached to participate in the study. Specifically, women attending the rehabilitation centers in 11 municipalities in Denmark (Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, the 3-municipality collaboration between Gentofte, Rudersdal and Lyngby-Taarbæk, and the 6-municipality collaboration between Herlev, Egedal, Ballerup, Rødovre, Furesø and Gladsaxe) will be recruited. Patients will be eligible and offered to participate if they comply with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Outcomes: Outcomes will be assessed at baseline and end of study. The baseline assessment includes standardized questionnaires and a clinical upper-body assessment. Similar questionnaires will be completed at the 12-week follow up visit. Primary outcomes: The primary objective of this study is to determine the feasibility and acceptability of this type of online rehabilitation to breast cancer survivors prior to progression to a full RCT. Feasibility will be measured using the four indicators listed below. Recruitment rate: All reasons for ineligibility or participant refusal to participate will be recorded to explain if any changes should be made to eligibility criteria in future studies. Retention and Adherence and safety to the intervention: Participants will be asked to record their adherence to their home-based rehabilitation program (i.e. sessions per week) in a logbook on a weekly basis and return the logbook at the end of the study. Program-specific outcomes such as the time spent doing rehabilitation exercises, pain/discomfort during or following the home-based rehabilitation exercises and reasons for discontinuing the rehabilitation program are included in this logbook, as well as participation in other rehabilitation exercise activities, breast cancer-specific group-based rehabilitation sessions or treatment by a physiotherapist. Participant adherence to the home-based exercise prescription will be calculated by the proportion of weeks where the home-based program was performed 5 to 7 times. In addition, the participants' use of the website will be tracked, specifically the website will track the number of times and the duration a participant has been logged onto the website across the 12 weeks. Participants who are enrolled in the study but fail to complete the end of study assessment will be recorded as dropouts. All dropouts will be contacted to determine reasons for non-participation and to collect suggestions for changes. If willing, they will be asked to complete the participant satisfaction questionnaire (see below for details). Feasibility will be defined as a drop out of \<10% and adherence of \> 75% to the prescribed home-based exercise sessions as determined by reports of performing the home-based program 5 to 7 times weekly in the weekly logbooks. Participant Satisfaction: At the end of the study data describing participant satisfaction will be collected to answers questions on acceptability. All participants will be given a questionnaire, delivered by Easy Research, and will be asked to rank various aspects of the intervention such as the home-based exercises supported by videos, mode of delivery, software, etc. as not at all satisfied, not very satisfied, somewhat satisfied or very satisfied. Feasibility will be defined as \>75% of participants reporting they are very or somewhat satisfied with the intervention. Capacity/ Resources: The amount of time spent with each participant during the standard upper-body assessments, instruction of the home-based intervention and assistance needed with using the website during the study period will be tracked. We will also record any additional appointments required to teach the home-based rehabilitation program or to assist in using the website. Secondary outcomes: In addition to the feasibility outcomes, the aim is to examine changes in outcomes of interest that may occur as a result of participation in this 12-week intervention. Intention, Attitude, Subjective norm, and Perceived behavior control for rehabilitation exercises: To further answers questions on motivation, the participants' reaction to the intervention, intend to use, and perceived appropriateness of the rehabilitation exercises will be answered. Behavioral changes in motivation to do home-based rehabilitation exercises will be measured as this is fundamental to adherence. The study method is theoretically based in the framework of Theory of Planned Behavior and has been validated in measuring motivation for exercise among cancer survivors including breast cancer patients. The Intention, Attitude and Subjective Norm Questionnaire is a 13-item Theory of Planned Behavior questionnaire modified for use with online home-based rehabilitation. Clinical outcomes in upper-body function: At baseline and after the 12-week intervention, physiotherapists blinded to prior baseline measurements will perform a standard upper-body assessment in all participants. Following measures will be assessed: 1) active shoulder mobility for flexion and external rotation 2) upper body muscle strength using Manual Muscle Testing 3) arm circumference will be measured at five points along the arm using a standardized protocol and measurement tape 4) patient-reported pain and tightness will be measured using a 0-10 VAS scale. Ability to perform activities of daily living: The self-reported QuickDASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand) is an 11-item questionnaire assessing arm disability affecting multiple arm joints. The QuickDASH will be administered at baseline and at the 12-week follow up visit, and will be used to assess changes in arm function during the study period. Timeline and proposed sample size: This study is the first to assess the feasibility of a new online rehabilitation platform. The aim is to start recruitment for the feasibility study from all 11 sites as soon as ethical approval has been obtained. For this feasibility study, the goal is to recruit as many women as possible during an eight-week recruitment period. Following the 12-week intervention, the study is expected to be completed in June 2016.

Interventions

OTHERHome-based upper-body rehabilitation with online support

Participants will be given written educational material, in which the physiotherapist marks the exercises specifically recommended for the individual patient. In addition, participants will get a personal password giving access to the BRECOR website for 12 weeks. The website contains professionally filmed videos of upper-body rehabilitation exercises (joint mobility and muscle strength) and instructions in scar tissue massage and manual lymph drainage. Furthermore, mindfulness sessions and additional information about prevention and early detection of late effects after breast cancer treatment are available on the website. On average, participants will complete three rehabilitation exercises 5-7 times weekly with an anticipated duration of approximately 20 minutes.

Sponsors

University of Copenhagen
CollaboratorOTHER
University of British Columbia
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

This study was conducted in two parts and thereby had two groups of participants. Part 1 participants were newly operated for breast cancer. Part 2 participants had completed surgery and radiation therapy for breast cancer. Both groups received the same intervention, namely a home-based rehabilitation program.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Diagnosis of breast cancer * Part 1 only: Surgery for breast cancer within the past eight weeks (mastectomy or lumpectomy with either sentinel or axillar dissection), including those women with a history of previous surgery for breast cancer, radiation therapy or chemotherapy * Part 2 only: Completion of surgery and radiation therapy for breast cancer within the past six weeks. * Home access to internet from stationary computer, lab top or tablet * Ability to use internet * Ability to read and understand Danish

Exclusion criteria

* Surgery for breast cancer with immediate breast reconstruction * Diagnosis of primary lymphedema * Metastatic or inflammatory breast cancer * Planned use of chemotherapy within the next 6 weeks * Surgical complications: infection, drainage issues, seroma, hematoma * Severe physical, cognitive, or psychiatric illness causing inability to follow the study protocol: i.e. severe depression, anxiety, dementia, poor physical health with likely possibility of hospitalization within the next twelve weeks. * Planned hospitalization or surgery within the next twelve weeks * Participation in another clinical trial with a rehabilitation or exercise intervention

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Recruitment Rate10 weeks for part 1 and 20 weeks for part 2This outcome represent the number and proportion (%) of eligible patients who consented to participate in the study. Recruitment was open for 10 weeks for participants in Part 1 and for 20 weeks for participants in Part 2.
Retention12 weeksParticipants who are enrolled in the study but fail to complete the end of study assessment will be recorded as dropouts. Feasibility will be defined as a drop out of \<10%
Number of Participants Reporting Being Very Satisfied or Somewhat Satisfied With the Program12 weeksAt the end of the study data describing participant satisfaction will be collected to answers questions on acceptability. All participants in part 1 and part 2 will be given a questionnaire, delivered by Easy Research, and will be asked to rank various aspects of the intervention such as the home-based exercises supported by videos, mode of delivery, software, etc. as not at all satisfied, not very satisfied, somewhat satisfied or very satisfied. Feasibility will be defined as \>75% of participants reporting they are very or somewhat satisfied with the intervention.
Capacity/ Resources12 weeksThe amount of time spent with each participant during the standard upper-body assessments, instruction of the home-based intervention and assistance needed with using the website during the study period will be tracked. In addition, any additional appointments required to teach the home-based rehabilitation program or to assist in using the website will be recorded. This information will help to determine the resources needed to administer the online component of the home-based program on a larger scale to a broader group of participants. This data was only collected for Part 1.
Adherence12 weeksParticipants in part 1 and part 2 were asked to perform the rehabilitation program at least four times weekly for the duration of the study (12 weeks). Adherence was calculated as the number and proportion of participants who reported in a follow-up questionnaire that they had performed four or more weekly sessions. As such, participants who reported to have completed the home-based rehabilitation program 4 times per week were categorized as having adhered to the program. Likewise, participants who reported to have completed the program 3 times or fewer per week were categorized as not having adhered to the program.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Clinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Mobility12 weeksActive shoulder mobility for flexion and external rotation. Changes from baseline to follow-up (12 weeks later) will be calculated. This data was only collected for participants in part 1.
Ability to Perform Activities of Daily Living12 weeksQuickDASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand) scores 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating more limitations in upper-body functioning.
Clinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle Strength12 weeksUpper body muscle strength was tested using Manual Muscle Testing among participants in part 1 only.
Clinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Arm Circumference12 weeksArm circumference at 5 points along the arm. Changes from baseline will be calculated.
Motivation for Rehabilitation Exercises12 weeksTo answers questions on motivation, the participants' reaction to the intervention, intend to use, and perceived appropriateness of the rehabilitation exercises will be answered. Behavioral changes in motivation to do home-based rehabilitation exercises will be measured as this is fundamental to adherence. The study method is theoretically based in the framework of Theory of Planned Behavior and has been validated in measuring motivation for exercise among cancer survivors including breast cancer patients. The Intention, Attitude and Subjective Norm Questionnaire is a 19-item Theory of Planned Behavior questionnaire modified for use with online home-based rehabilitation. All questions are answered using a 7 point Likert scale and produces effect sizes (Cohen's D). The Theory of Planned Behavior scale is scored on a 0 to 7 scale with a higher score indicating a greater level of motivation.
Clinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Pain12 weeksPatient-reported pain on a 0-10 Visual Analogue Scale in the breast/arm region. A higher score indicates greater level of pain. Changes from baseline will be calculated. This data was only collected for part 1.

Countries

Denmark

Participant flow

Recruitment details

We had pre-defined recruitment period and not a sample size goal. The recruitment period was 10 weeks for part 1 of the study (recruiting women within 8 weeks of surgery for breast cancer) and 20 weeks for part 2 (recruiting women within 6 weeks of completing radiation therapy for breast cancer).

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Part 1: Home-based Rehabilitation
Home-based upper-body rehabilitation with online support Home-based upper-body rehabilitation with online support: Participants will be given written educational material, in which the physiotherapist marks the exercises specifically recommended for the individual patient. In addition, participants will get a personal password giving access to the BRECOR website for 12 weeks. The website contains professionally filmed videos of upper-body rehabilitation exercises (joint mobility and muscle strength) and instructions in scar tissue massage and manual lymph drainage. Furthermore, mindfulness sessions and additional information about prevention and early detection of late effects after breast cancer treatment are available on the website. On average, participants will complete three rehabilitation exercises a minimum of 4 times weekly with an anticipated duration of approximately 20 minutes.
35
Part 2: Home-based Rehabilitation
Home-based upper-body rehabilitation with online support Home-based upper-body rehabilitation with online support: Participants will be given written educational material, in which the physiotherapist marks the exercises specifically recommended for the individual patient. In addition, participants will get a personal password giving access to the BRECOR website for 12 weeks. The website contains professionally filmed videos of upper-body rehabilitation exercises (joint mobility and muscle strength) and instructions in scar tissue massage and manual lymph drainage. Furthermore, mindfulness sessions and additional information about prevention and early detection of late effects after breast cancer treatment are available on the website. On average, participants will complete three rehabilitation exercises a minimum of 4 times weekly with an anticipated duration of approximately 20 minutes.
24
Total59

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicPart 1: Home-based RehabilitationPart 2: Home-based RehabilitationTotal
Age, Continuous60.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.6
55.0 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.9
57.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.8
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
35 Participants24 Participants59 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
35 Participants24 Participants59 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 350 / 24
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 350 / 24
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 350 / 24

Outcome results

Primary

Adherence

Participants in part 1 and part 2 were asked to perform the rehabilitation program at least four times weekly for the duration of the study (12 weeks). Adherence was calculated as the number and proportion of participants who reported in a follow-up questionnaire that they had performed four or more weekly sessions. As such, participants who reported to have completed the home-based rehabilitation program 4 times per week were categorized as having adhered to the program. Likewise, participants who reported to have completed the program 3 times or fewer per week were categorized as not having adhered to the program.

Time frame: 12 weeks

Population: This is the number of participants in part 1 and part 2 who completed the study and who's data was analysed.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationAdherence21 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationAdherence9 Participants
Primary

Capacity/ Resources

The amount of time spent with each participant during the standard upper-body assessments, instruction of the home-based intervention and assistance needed with using the website during the study period will be tracked. In addition, any additional appointments required to teach the home-based rehabilitation program or to assist in using the website will be recorded. This information will help to determine the resources needed to administer the online component of the home-based program on a larger scale to a broader group of participants. This data was only collected for Part 1.

Time frame: 12 weeks

Population: The data on capacity was only collected for Part 1 participants and not for part 2.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationCapacity/ Resources92.4 minutesStandard Deviation 27.1
Primary

Number of Participants Reporting Being Very Satisfied or Somewhat Satisfied With the Program

At the end of the study data describing participant satisfaction will be collected to answers questions on acceptability. All participants in part 1 and part 2 will be given a questionnaire, delivered by Easy Research, and will be asked to rank various aspects of the intervention such as the home-based exercises supported by videos, mode of delivery, software, etc. as not at all satisfied, not very satisfied, somewhat satisfied or very satisfied. Feasibility will be defined as \>75% of participants reporting they are very or somewhat satisfied with the intervention.

Time frame: 12 weeks

Population: This is the number of participants in part 1 and part 2 who completed the study and who's data was analyzed.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationNumber of Participants Reporting Being Very Satisfied or Somewhat Satisfied With the Program16 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationNumber of Participants Reporting Being Very Satisfied or Somewhat Satisfied With the Program12 Participants
Primary

Recruitment Rate

This outcome represent the number and proportion (%) of eligible patients who consented to participate in the study. Recruitment was open for 10 weeks for participants in Part 1 and for 20 weeks for participants in Part 2.

Time frame: 10 weeks for part 1 and 20 weeks for part 2

Population: This was the number of women who were eligible and invited to participate.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationRecruitment Rate35 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationRecruitment Rate24 Participants
Primary

Retention

Participants who are enrolled in the study but fail to complete the end of study assessment will be recorded as dropouts. Feasibility will be defined as a drop out of \<10%

Time frame: 12 weeks

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationRetention29 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationRetention20 Participants
Secondary

Ability to Perform Activities of Daily Living

QuickDASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand) scores 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating more limitations in upper-body functioning.

Time frame: 12 weeks

Population: At baseline, 35 participants in part 1 and 20 participants in part 2 completed the QuickDASH questionnaire. At follow-up, 24 participants in part 1 and 17 participants in part 2 completed the questionnaire.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationAbility to Perform Activities of Daily LivingBaseline19.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.3
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationAbility to Perform Activities of Daily LivingFollow up15.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.8
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationAbility to Perform Activities of Daily LivingBaseline13.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.8
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationAbility to Perform Activities of Daily LivingFollow up11.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.2
Secondary

Clinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Arm Circumference

Arm circumference at 5 points along the arm. Changes from baseline will be calculated.

Time frame: 12 weeks

Population: Handling errors compromised data integrity. Specifically, data was not collected at the end of study time point. This prohibited reporting and analysis of data.

Secondary

Clinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Mobility

Active shoulder mobility for flexion and external rotation. Changes from baseline to follow-up (12 weeks later) will be calculated. This data was only collected for participants in part 1.

Time frame: 12 weeks

Population: A 3-level categorical outcome was applied (not limited, moderately limited, greatly limited).

ArmMeasureGroupCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: FlexionNot limited19 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: FlexionNot limited27 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: External rotationMissing4 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: External rotationNot limited21 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: External rotationModerately limited11 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: FlexionModerately limited13 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: FlexionGreatly limited1 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: FlexionMissing2 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: FlexionModerately limited1 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: FlexionGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: FlexionMissing1 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: External rotationNot limited17 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: External rotationGreatly limited3 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: External rotationModerately limited6 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: External rotationGreatly limited1 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: External rotationMissing1 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: External rotationModerately limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: FlexionNot limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: FlexionModerately limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: FlexionNot limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: External rotationGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: External rotationMissing0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: External rotationMissing0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: FlexionGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: External rotationNot limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: External rotationGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: FlexionMissing0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: FlexionModerately limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityEnd of study: External rotationModerately limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: FlexionGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: External rotationNot limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: MobilityBaseline: FlexionMissing0 Participants
p-value: 0.05Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Secondary

Clinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle Strength

Upper body muscle strength was tested using Manual Muscle Testing among participants in part 1 only.

Time frame: 12 weeks

Population: A 3-level categorical outcome was applied (not limited, moderately limited, greatly limited).

ArmMeasureGroupCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Latissimus DorsiGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Latissimus DorsiModerately limited9 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Latissimus DorsiGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Latissimus DorsiMissing1 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Latissimus DorsiNot limited25 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Latissimus DorsiModerately limited1 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Latissimus DorsiNot limited25 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Latissimus DorsiMissing3 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Serratus AnteriorNot limited16 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Serratus AnteriorModerately limited13 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Serratus AnteriorGreatly limited1 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Serratus AnteriorMissing5 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Serratus AnteriorNot limited16 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Serratus AnteriorModerately limited10 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Serratus AnteriorGreatly limited1 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Serratus AnteriorMissing2 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Pectoralis MajorNot limited13 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Pectoralis MajorModerately limited18 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Pectoralis MajorGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Pectoralis MajorMissing4 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Pectoralis MajorNot limited17 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Pectoralis MajorModerately limited8 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Pectoralis MajorGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Pectoralis MajorMissing4 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Pectoralis MajorGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Latissimus DorsiNot limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Serratus AnteriorNot limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Latissimus DorsiModerately limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Pectoralis MajorGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Latissimus DorsiGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Serratus AnteriorModerately limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Latissimus DorsiMissing0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Pectoralis MajorModerately limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Latissimus DorsiNot limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Serratus AnteriorGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Latissimus DorsiModerately limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Pectoralis MajorMissing0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Latissimus DorsiGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Serratus AnteriorMissing0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Latissimus DorsiMissing0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Pectoralis MajorMissing0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Serratus AnteriorNot limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Pectoralis MajorNot limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Serratus AnteriorModerately limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthEnd of study: Pectoralis MajorNot limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Serratus AnteriorGreatly limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Pectoralis MajorModerately limited0 Participants
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Muscle StrengthBaseline: Serratus AnteriorMissing0 Participants
p-value: 0.05Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)
Secondary

Clinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: Pain

Patient-reported pain on a 0-10 Visual Analogue Scale in the breast/arm region. A higher score indicates greater level of pain. Changes from baseline will be calculated. This data was only collected for part 1.

Time frame: 12 weeks

Population: Participants in part 2 did not have a clinical assessment at follow up and this data is therefore not collected for part 2, but only collected for part 1.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: PainBaseline1.0 score on a scale
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationClinical Outcomes in Upper-body Function: PainFollow up1.0 score on a scale
Secondary

Motivation for Rehabilitation Exercises

To answers questions on motivation, the participants' reaction to the intervention, intend to use, and perceived appropriateness of the rehabilitation exercises will be answered. Behavioral changes in motivation to do home-based rehabilitation exercises will be measured as this is fundamental to adherence. The study method is theoretically based in the framework of Theory of Planned Behavior and has been validated in measuring motivation for exercise among cancer survivors including breast cancer patients. The Intention, Attitude and Subjective Norm Questionnaire is a 19-item Theory of Planned Behavior questionnaire modified for use with online home-based rehabilitation. All questions are answered using a 7 point Likert scale and produces effect sizes (Cohen's D). The Theory of Planned Behavior scale is scored on a 0 to 7 scale with a higher score indicating a greater level of motivation.

Time frame: 12 weeks

Population: In part 1, the subscale Intention had too low internal consistency to be included in the analysis. No results are therefore reported for this group.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesInstrumental attitude6.45 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.54
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesAffective attitude4.82 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.09
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesSubjective norm6.34 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.97
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesPlanning5.69 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.91
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesSelf-efficacy5.90 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.46
Part 1: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesPerceived behavioral control6.09 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.21
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesSubjective norm5.90 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.36
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesIntention6.20 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.12
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesInstrumental attitude6.38 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.42
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesSelf-efficacy5.46 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.48
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesAffective attitude4.45 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.15
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesPerceived behavioral control5.26 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.48
Part 2: Home-based RehabilitationMotivation for Rehabilitation ExercisesPlanning5.16 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026