Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Research Article

Vol. 19 No. 1 (2021)

Community-based exercise program for solid organ transplant recipients: Views of exercise professionals and patients

  • Catherine Bednarczyk
  • Catherine M. Tansey
  • Shawn Fontaine
  • Stephanie Baker
  • Érika Laberge
  • Sunita Mathur
  • Heather Lambert
  • Tania Janaudis-Ferreira+
DOI
https://doi.org/10.26443/mjm.v19i1.218
Submitted
August 10, 2020
Published
2021-01-30

Abstract

Purpose of the study: Although transplantation improves quality of life in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, recipients continue to have limitations in exercise capacity and decreased levels of physical activity (PA) years after transplant. Community Based Exercise (CBE) programs have been shown to successfully increase PA levels in other populations, however none exist for SOT recipients.

Objective: To identify important factors when developing and implementing a CBE program for SOT recipients.

Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with seven SOT recipients, and six exercise professionals (EPs). The data was analyzed using thematic analysis.

Main findings: Six themes were identified: 1) Motivators to exercise; 2) Perceived barriers to exercise (financial vulnerability post-transplantation, fear of injury, lack of exercise recommendations and medication side effect); 3) Level of supervision (recipients wanted guidance without overprotective supervision, while EPs were torn between extensive monitoring, and promoting independence); 4) Required education and foundational knowledge in EPs; 5) The importance of CBE programs for the SOT population; and 6) Tailored program structure (group setting with individualized exercise prescription).

Principal conclusions: Recommendations may be used to develop an effective CBE program for SOT recipients, and thus improve PA levels among this population.

References

  1. Williams TJ, McKenna MJ. Exercise limitation following transplantation. Compr Physiol. 2012;2(3):1937-79.
  2. Gustaw T, Schoo E, Barbalinardo C, et al. Physical activity in solid organ transplant recipients: Participation, predictors, barriers, and facilitators. Clin Transplant. 2017;31(4).
  3. Evangelista LS, Dracup K, Doering L, et al. Physical activity patterns in heart transplant women. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2005;20(5):334-9.
  4. Didsbury M, McGee RG, Tong A, et al. Exercise training in solid organ transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Transplantation. 2013;95(5):679-87.
  5. Laish I, Braun M, Mor E, et al. Metabolic syndrome in liver transplant recipients: prevalence, risk factors, and association with cardiovascular events. Liver Transpl. 2011;17(1):15-22.
  6. Pilmore H, Dent H, Chang S, et al. Reduction in cardiovascular death after kidney transplantation. Transplantation. 2010;89(7):851-7.
  7. Trojetto T, Elliott RJ, Rashid S, et al. Availability, characteristics, and barriers of rehabilitation programs in organ transplant populations across Canada. Clin Transplant. 2011;25(6):E571-8.
  8. Montgomery FA, Reid SM, Mandrak NE. A habitat-based frameFwork to predict the effects of agricultural drain maintenance on imperiled fishes. J Environ Manage. 2018;206:1104-14.
  9. Stuart M, Benvenuti F, Macko R, et al. Community-based adaptive physical activity program for chronic stroke: feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the Empoli model. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23(7):726-34.
  10. Carter ND, Khan KM, McKay HA, et al. Community-based exercise program reduces risk factors for falls in 65- to 75-year-old women with osteoporosis: randomized controlled trial. CMAJ. 2002;167(9):997-1004.
  11. Fishman JA. Infection in solid-organ transplant recipients. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(25):2601-14.
  12. Zelle DM, Corpeleijn E, Klaassen G, et al. Fear of Movement and Low Self-Efficacy Are Important Barriers in Physical Activity after Renal Transplantation. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0147609.
  13. Matua GA, Van Der Wal DM. Differentiating between descriptive and interpretive phenomenological research approaches. Nurse Res. 2015;22(6):22-7.
  14. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349-57.
  15. Lee PH, Macfarlane DJ, Lam TH, et al. Validity of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire Short Form (IPAQ-SF): a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8:115.
  16. Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field methods. 2006;18(1):59-82.
  17. Braun V, Clarke V, Hayfield N, et al. Thematic analysis. Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences. 2019:843-60.
  18. Fraser SN, Spink KS. Examining the role of social support and group cohesion in exercise compliance. J Behav Med. 2002;25(3):233-49.
  19. McNeill LH, Wyrwich KW, Brownson RC, et al. Individual, social environmental, and physical environmental influences on physical activity among black and white adults: a structural equation analysis. Ann Behav Med. 2006;31(1):36-44.
  20. Estabrooks PA, Carron AV. Group cohesion in older adult exercisers: prediction and intervention effects. J Behav Med. 1999;22(6):575-88.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...