Devon Noonan, Amnazo Muhirwa, Elaine Sang, Nicole Calhoun, Ardis Crews, Kellen Peter, Henry Crews, Lucette Mercer, Lisa Macon Harrison, Shauna L Guthrie, Kathryn I Pollak
{"title":"Pilot study of the DeStress for Health Program: a community-engaged stress reduction and cancer prevention intervention for rural communities.","authors":"Devon Noonan, Amnazo Muhirwa, Elaine Sang, Nicole Calhoun, Ardis Crews, Kellen Peter, Henry Crews, Lucette Mercer, Lisa Macon Harrison, Shauna L Guthrie, Kathryn I Pollak","doi":"10.1186/s40814-026-01811-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Stress related to personal, social, and environmental factors has been linked to engaging in unhealthy behaviors. These behaviors may increase cancer risk. Most current prevention programs do not address stress related to social factors and related stresses that are driving unhealthy behaviors. The purpose of this study was to pilot the DeStress for Heath Program.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial. Community members from two rural counties were randomized to the DeStress for Health Program group or a waitlist control group. The DeStress for Health Program, developed using a community engaged approach, is a 4-class, in-person, nurse delivered evidenced-based intervention that uses both positive psychology and health behaviour goal setting to address stress reduction and cancer risk behaviours. We offered the program to the waitlist control group after completion of all assessments. Self-report surveys were completed at baseline and 30 days post-intervention in the DeStress arm to assess feasibility and acceptability and 30 days post 4-week wait time in the control. Study outcomes for feasibility included recruitment, retention, and engagement, and acceptability included positive endorsement of the intervention and changes in stress and health behaviours.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We recruited 29 participants in 6 months, missing our feasibility recruitment benchmark. We did not meet our feasibility benchmark of having 75% of participants attend all 4 classes, with 69% of residents attended at least 2 classes. We retained 21 of 29 (72%) participants at follow-up. Acceptability results include the DeStress group reported that the intervention reduced daily stress (n = 13, 81.3%), helped encourage better nutrition (n = 15, 93.8%) and physical activity (n = 15, 93.8%), and would recommend the program to a friend (n = 15, 93.8%). DeStress improved scores on the Perceived Stress Scale over time compared to the waitlist control.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The DeStress intervention is acceptable and demonstrates improvements in stress. Feasibility benchmarks were not all met, and suggestions for future adaptations to improve feasibility are discussed. DeStress underscores the importance of developing programs that address real community needs and linking intervention programs with community resources, particularly in rural communities where health-related resources can be scarce.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03776890.</p>","PeriodicalId":20176,"journal":{"name":"Pilot and Feasibility Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13188702/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pilot and Feasibility Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-026-01811-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Stress related to personal, social, and environmental factors has been linked to engaging in unhealthy behaviors. These behaviors may increase cancer risk. Most current prevention programs do not address stress related to social factors and related stresses that are driving unhealthy behaviors. The purpose of this study was to pilot the DeStress for Heath Program.
Methods: We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial. Community members from two rural counties were randomized to the DeStress for Health Program group or a waitlist control group. The DeStress for Health Program, developed using a community engaged approach, is a 4-class, in-person, nurse delivered evidenced-based intervention that uses both positive psychology and health behaviour goal setting to address stress reduction and cancer risk behaviours. We offered the program to the waitlist control group after completion of all assessments. Self-report surveys were completed at baseline and 30 days post-intervention in the DeStress arm to assess feasibility and acceptability and 30 days post 4-week wait time in the control. Study outcomes for feasibility included recruitment, retention, and engagement, and acceptability included positive endorsement of the intervention and changes in stress and health behaviours.
Results: We recruited 29 participants in 6 months, missing our feasibility recruitment benchmark. We did not meet our feasibility benchmark of having 75% of participants attend all 4 classes, with 69% of residents attended at least 2 classes. We retained 21 of 29 (72%) participants at follow-up. Acceptability results include the DeStress group reported that the intervention reduced daily stress (n = 13, 81.3%), helped encourage better nutrition (n = 15, 93.8%) and physical activity (n = 15, 93.8%), and would recommend the program to a friend (n = 15, 93.8%). DeStress improved scores on the Perceived Stress Scale over time compared to the waitlist control.
Discussion: The DeStress intervention is acceptable and demonstrates improvements in stress. Feasibility benchmarks were not all met, and suggestions for future adaptations to improve feasibility are discussed. DeStress underscores the importance of developing programs that address real community needs and linking intervention programs with community resources, particularly in rural communities where health-related resources can be scarce.
期刊介绍：
Pilot and Feasibility Studies encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of pilot and feasibility studies in biomedicine. The journal publishes research articles that are intended to directly influence future clinical trials or large scale observational studies, as well as protocols, commentaries and methodology articles. The journal also ensures that the results of all well-conducted, peer-reviewed, pilot and feasibility studies are published, regardless of outcome or significance of findings. Pilot and feasibility studies are increasingly conducted prior to a full randomized controlled trial. However, these studies often lack clear objectives, many remain unpublished, and there is confusion over the meanings of the words “pilot” and “feasibility”. Pilot and Feasibility Studies provides a forum for discussion around this key aspect of the scientific process, and seeks to ensure that these studies are published, so as to complete the publication thread for clinical research.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
