2021
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182312622
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Psychosocial and Biological Outcomes of Immersive, Mindfulness-Based Treks in Nature for Groups of Young Adults and Caregivers Affected by Cancer: Results from a Single Arm Program Evaluation from 2016–2021

Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic has left many individuals suffering from “connection deficit disorder” given changes to the way we work, go to school, socialize, and engage in daily activities. Young adults affected by cancer between the ages of 18–39 have known this connection deficit long before the pandemic. Being diagnosed and treated for cancer during this time can significantly disrupt engagement in important educational, career, social, and reproductive pursuits, and contribute to increased stress, anxiety, depre… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Recent systematic reviews and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of adventure and wilderness programs among AYA cancer survivors [ 29 ] or juvenile delinquents [ 65 ] do not mention nor discuss program-related safety issues. Safety reporting is also lacking in another recently published study on the effects of a wilderness program among AYA cancer survivors [ 66 ]. In clinical guideline development and other health-related decision making, possible benefits of wilderness programs should always be weighed against the risks of participation in such programs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent systematic reviews and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of adventure and wilderness programs among AYA cancer survivors [ 29 ] or juvenile delinquents [ 65 ] do not mention nor discuss program-related safety issues. Safety reporting is also lacking in another recently published study on the effects of a wilderness program among AYA cancer survivors [ 66 ]. In clinical guideline development and other health-related decision making, possible benefits of wilderness programs should always be weighed against the risks of participation in such programs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, there is a paucity of intervention research aimed at helping cancer survivors return to meaningful participation in their roles and responsibilities [ 59 ]. There is, however, a need to more fully support cancer survivors through the provision of evidence-informed interventions, including, for example, self-management [ 60 , 61 ] and mindfulness-based interventions [ 62 , 63 ] with an aim towards addressing participation restrictions, social connectedness, and amelioration of physical, cognitive, and psychosocial function. To reach the broadest group of survivors, interventions may be delivered in-person, hybrid or via mHealth tools.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the heterogeneity of the sample and the small number of participants, our study contributes to underline the importance and beneficial effect of the forest medicine, which may be used to develop new strategies in particular regarding primary and secondary level strategies in the field of preventive medicine. Promoting a usual and consistent approach to forest therapy may implement institutional and local resources to avoid or reduce an incorrect lifestyle encouraging health promotion and chronic disease prevention, as interestingly demonstrated in a program involving a young population affected by cancer complicated by a syndrome called by the authors "connection deficit disorder" due to the actual COVID-19 pandemic [23]. According to these observations, our future purpose will be to demonstrate that forest therapy is potentially effective in alleviating mental health issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic by restoring psychological wellbeing.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%