Exploring the Acceptability of an Age-Specific Multidimensional Rehabilitation Program for Young Adult Cancer Survivors: A Qualitative Feasibility Study
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2026
Exploring the Acceptability of an Age-Specific Multidimensional Rehabilitation Program for Young Adult Cancer Survivors: A Qualitative Feasibility Study
To explore the acceptability of the content and delivery of the age-specific cancer rehabilitation program Young Adults Taking Action (YATAC) from the perspective of young adult cancer survivors (YACSs).
Methods:
Nineteen YACSs (aged 18–39) participated. Program acceptability was explored through four focus groups. The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability guided data collection and analysis. Data from the focus groups were deductively analyzed using framework analysis.
Results:
The YACSs found the YATAC program acceptable and relevant to their needs. The participants reported enhanced physical self-efficacy, improved mood, greater acceptance of their condition, reduced loneliness, and increased confidence in managing daily life. Peer support, practical exercises, and tailored content were identified as particularly valuable. Referring to delivery acceptance, participants described the program format as engaging and supportive, though some found the intensive schedule burdensome. Few suggested removing content; instead, they recommended extending sessions and adding topics such as diet, fertility, and cognitive concerns. The participants also highlighted the need for clearer guidance on accessing resources after the program. Group discussions were generally beneficial; however, some participants expressed discomfort around discussing sensitive topics in mixed settings.
Conclusion:
The YATAC program was well received and perceived as beneficial by YACSs, particularly when sessions were practical, peer-supported, and individualized. The findings support the program’s continued development and refinement.
Implications for Cancer Survivors
: This study highlights the importance of peer interaction and personalized content and thoughtful delivery design in survivorship care for young adults. Future research should explore long-term and wider outcomes.
AbdelhadiOA, JosephJ, PollockBH, et al.Additional medical costs of chronic conditions among adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv, 2022; 16(3):487–496; doi: 10.1007/s11764-021-01044-4
2.
JanssenSHM, van der MeerDJ, van EenbergenM, et al.Short- and long-term impact of cancer on employment and financial outcomes of adolescents and young adults (AYAs): A large population-based case-control registry study in the Netherlands. ESMO Open, 2022; 7(4):100521; doi: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100521
3.
SchulteFSM, ChalifourK, EatonG, et al.Quality of life among survivors of adolescent and young adult cancer in Canada: A Young Adults With Cancer in Their Prime (YACPRIME) study. Cancer, 2021; 127(8):1325–1333; doi: 10.1002/cncr.33372
4.
JanssenSHM, van der GraafWTA, van der MeerDJ, et al.Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) cancer survivorship practices: An overview. Cancers (Basel), 2021; 13(19):4847; doi: 10.3390/cancers13194847
5.
TramaA, StarkD, Bozovic-SpasojevicI, et al.Cancer burden in adolescents and young adults in Europe. ESMO Open, 2023; 8(1):100744; doi: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100744
YouL, LvZ, LiC, et al.Worldwide cancer statistics of adolescents and young adults in 2019: A systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. ESMO Open, 2021; 6(5):100255; doi: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100255
8.
MillerKD, Fidler-BenaoudiaM, KeeganTH, et al.Cancer statistics for adolescents and young adults, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin, 2020; 70(6):443–459; doi: 10.3322/caac.21637
9.
ThorsenL, BøhnSH, LieHC, et al.Needs for information about lifestyle and rehabilitation in long-term young adult cancer survivors. Support Care Cancer, 2022; 30(1):521–533; doi: 10.1007/s00520-021-06418-z
10.
DahlAA, FossåSD, LieHC, et al.Employment status and work ability in long-term young adult cancer survivors. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol, 2019; 8(3):304–311; doi: 10.1089/jayao.2018.0109
11.
HussonO, ZebrackBJ, AguilarC, et al.Cancer in adolescents and young adults: Who remains at risk of poor social functioning over time? Cancer, 2017; 123(14):2743–2751; doi: 10.1002/cncr.30656
12.
MaoJJ, ArmstrongK, BowmanMA, et al.Symptom burden among cancer survivors: Impact of age and comorbidity. J Am Board Fam Med, 2007; 20(5):434–443; doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2007.05.060225
13.
WarnerEL, KentEE, TrevinoKM, et al.Social well-being among adolescents and young adults with cancer: A systematic review. Cancer, 2016; 122(7):1029–1037; doi: 10.1002/cncr.29866
14.
BleyerA, BarrR. Cancer in young adults 20 to 39 years of age: Overview. Semin Oncol, 2009; 36(3):194–206; doi: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2009.03.003
15.
PattersonP, McDonaldFE, ZebrackB, et al.Emerging issues among adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. Semin Oncol Nurs, 2015; 31(1):53–59; doi: 10.1016/j.soncn.2014.11.006
16.
ForbesC, TannerS, EngstromT, et al.Patient reported fatigue among adolescent and young adult cancer patients compared to non-cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol, 2024; 13(2):242–250; doi: 10.1089/jayao.2023.0094
17.
VandraasKF, ReinertsenKV, KiserudCE, et al.Fear of cancer recurrence among young adult cancer survivors—exploring long-term contributing factors in a large, population-based cohort. J Cancer Surviv, 2021; 15(4):497–508; doi: 10.1007/s11764-020-00943-2
18.
BentsenL, AagesenM, BidstrupP, et al.Sexuality, intimacy, and body image among adolescents and young adults with cancer: A qualitative, explorative study. Support Care Cancer, 2024; 32(4):219; doi: 10.1007/s00520-024-08405-6
19.
BentsenL, PappotH, HjermingM, et al.Thoughts about fertility among female adolescents and young adults with cancer: A qualitative study. Support Care Cancer, 2023; 31(7):421; doi: 10.1007/s00520-023-07887-0
20.
HaukenMA, LarsenTM, HolsenI. Meeting reality: Young adult cancer survivors’ experiences of reentering everyday life after cancer treatment. Cancer Nurs, 2013; 36(5):E17–E26; doi: 10.1097/NCC.0b013e318278d4fc
21.
ThorntonCP, LiM, YehCH, et al.Self-efficacy in symptom management for adolescents and young adults with cancer: A systematic review. Support Care Cancer, 2021; 29(6):2851–2862; doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05960-6
22.
DeRouenMC, SmithAW, TaoL, et al.; AYA HOPE Study Collaborative Group. Cancer-related information needs and cancer’s impact on control over life influence health-related quality of life among adolescents and young adults with cancer. Psychooncology, 2015; 24(9):1104–1115; doi: 10.1002/pon.3730
23.
GuzikP, McKinneyJA, UlackC, et al.Outcomes that matter most to young adults diagnosed with cancer: A qualitative study. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol, 2021; 10(5):534–539; doi: 10.1089/jayao.2020.0150
24.
AdamsSC, HermanJ, LegaIC, et al.Young adult cancer survivorship: Recommendations for patient follow-up, exercise therapy, and research. JNCI Cancer Spectr, 2021; 5(1):pkaa099; doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkaa099
25.
MariboT, IbsenC, ThuesenJ, et al.Hvidbog om rehabilitering [White Book on Rehabiltation].Rehabiliteringsforum: Aarhus, Danmark; 2022.
26.
WadeDT. What is rehabilitation? An empirical investigation leading to an evidence-based description. Clin Rehabil, 2020; 34(5):571–583; doi: 10.1177/0269215520905112
27.
KudreD, ChenZ, RichardA, et al.Multidisciplinary outpatient cancer rehabilitation can improve cancer patients’ physical and psychosocial status-a systematic review. Curr Oncol Rep, 2020; 22(12):122; doi: 10.1007/s11912-020-00979-8
28.
Szczepańska-GierachaJ, MazurekJ. The role of self-efficacy in the recovery process of stroke survivors. Psychol Res Behav Manag, 2020; 13:897–906; doi: 10.2147/prbm.S273009
29.
FitchMI, NicollI, LockwoodG, et al.Adolescent and young adult perspectives on challenges and improvements to cancer survivorship care: How are we doing? J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol, 2021; 10(4):432–442; doi: 10.1089/jayao.2020.0097
30.
AagesenM, la CourK, MøllerJK, et al.Rehabilitation interventions for young adult cancer survivors: A scoping review. Clin Rehabil, 2023; 37(10):1347–1374; doi: 10.1177/02692155231168720
31.
AagesenM, PilegaardMS, JanssensA, et al.Development of a rehabilitation programme for young adult cancer survivors using co-production. Res Involv Engagem, 2024; 10(1):134; doi: 10.1186/s40900-024-00667-y
32.
AagesenM, la CourK, HaukenMA, et al.The ‘Young Adult Taking Action’ programme for young adult cancer survivors: A study protocol for a feasibility study. Scand J Occup Ther, 2023; 30(8):1472–1488; doi: 10.1080/11038128.2023.2244563
33.
TongA, SainsburyP, CraigJ. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care, 2007; 19(6):349–357; doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
34.
SekhonM, CartwrightM, FrancisJJ. Acceptability of healthcare interventions: An overview of reviews and development of a theoretical framework. BMC Health Serv Res, 2017; 17(1):88; doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2031-8
35.
OlesenLK, la CourK, WithH, et al.A cross-sectional evaluation of acceptability of an online palliative rehabilitation program for family caregivers of people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and cognitive and behavioral impairments. BMC Health Serv Res, 2022; 22(1):697; doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-07986-4
36.
Chew-GrahamCA, KitchenCEW, GascoyneS, et al.The feasibility and acceptability of a brief psychological intervention for adults with long-term health conditions and subthreshold depression delivered via community pharmacies: A mixed methods evaluation-the Community Pharmacies Mood Intervention Study (CHEMIST). Pilot Feasibility Stud, 2022; 8(1):27; doi: 10.1186/s40814-022-00992-7
37.
LiptrottSJ, LovellK, BeeP. Influence of needs and experiences of Haemato-oncology patients on acceptability of a telephone intervention for support and symptom management: A qualitative study. Clin Nurs Res, 2020; 29(8):627–637; doi: 10.1177/1054773820940865
38.
PavlovaN, TeychenneM, OlanderEK. The concurrent acceptability of a postnatal walking group: A qualitative study using the theoretical framework of acceptability. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2020; 17(14):5027; doi: 10.3390/ijerph17145027
39.
RasmussenA, JespersenE, BackmannT, et al.Practice description, research clinic REHPA. Standard residential rehabilitation course for people with or after cancer. REHPA, The Danish Knowledge Center for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care: Nyborg; 2020.
40.
DeanSG, SiegertRJ, TaylorWJ. Interprofessional Rehabilitation: A Person-Centred Approach. Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester, West Sussex, UK; 2012.
41.
BanduraA. Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annu Rev Psychol, 2001; 52:1–26; doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
42.
John Dewey Society. Education and culture. Iowa City: University of Iowa; 1944.
43.
HoffmannTC, GlasziouPP, BoutronI, et al.Better reporting of interventions: Template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. Bmj, 2014; 348:g1687; doi: 10.1136/bmj.g1687
44.
ColeMB. Group dynamics in occupational therapy: The Theoretical basis and Practice application of group intervention. SLACK Incorporated: New Jersey, USA; 2017.
45.
HarrisPA, TaylorR, MinorBL, et al.; REDCap Consortium. The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform, 2019; 95:103208; doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208
46.
BrinkmannS, KvaleS. InterViews. Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA; 2015.
47.
RitchieJ, LewisJ, McNaughtonNC, et al.Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. Sage: London; 2013.
48.
GrindellC, CoatesE, CrootL, et al.The use of co-production, co-design and co-creation to mobilise knowledge in the management of health conditions: A systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res, 2022; 22(1):877; doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08079-y
49.
StokFM, de RidderDTD, de VetE, et al.Hungry for an intervention? Adolescents’ ratings of acceptability of eating-related intervention strategies. BMC Public Health, 2016; 16(1):5; doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2665-6
50.
SomefunOD, CasaleM, Haupt RonnieG, et al.Decade of research into the acceptability of interventions aimed at improving adolescent and youth health and social outcomes in Africa: A systematic review and evidence map. BMJ Open, 2021; 11(12):e055160; doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055160
51.
KellyD, PearceS, MulhallA. ‘Being in the same boat’: ethnographic insights into an adolescent cancer unit. Int J Nurs Stud, 2004; 41(8):847–857; doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2004.03.011
52.
MatsuiM, TakuK, TsutsumiR, et al.Role of peer support in posttraumatic growth among adolescent and young adult cancer patients and survivors. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol, 2023; 12(4):503–511; doi: 10.1089/jayao.2022.0064
53.
HaukenMA, HolsenI, FismenE, et al.Participating in life again: A mixed-method study on a goal-orientated rehabilitation program for young adult cancer survivors. Cancer Nurs, 2014; 37(4):E48–E59; doi: 10.1097/NCC.0b013e31829a9add
54.
PhanJ, LaurenceV, Marec-BerardP, et al.The place of sick peers in adolescents and young adults with cancer: Advantage, disadvantage, and what makes barriers to the encounter. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol, 2023; 12(6):879–889; doi: 10.1089/jayao.2022.0176
55.
JablotschkinM, BinkowskiL, Markovits HoopiiR, et al.Benefits and challenges of cancer peer support groups: A systematic review of qualitative studies. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl), 2022; 31(6):e13700; doi: 10.1111/ecc.13700
56.
CrawfordL, MaxwellJ, ColquhounH, et al.Facilitators and barriers to patient-centred goal-setting in rehabilitation: A scoping review. Clin Rehabil, 2022; 36(12):1694–1704; doi: 10.1177/02692155221121006
57.
LidingtonE, VlooswijkC, StallardK, et al.‘This is not part of my life plan’: A qualitative study on the psychosocial experiences and practical challenges in young adults with cancer age 25 to 39 years at diagnosis. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl), 2021; 30(5):e13458; doi: 10.1111/ecc.13458
58.
DevineKA, ViolaAS, CoupsEJ, et al.Digital health interventions for adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. JCO Clin Cancer Inform, 2018; 2:1–15; doi: 10.1200/cci.17.00138
59.
KiemenA, CzornikM, WeisJ. How effective is peer-to-peer support in cancer patients and survivors? A systematic review. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 2023; 149(11):9461–9485; doi: 10.1007/s00432-023-04753-8
60.
CorkeL, LangelierDM, GuptaAA, et al.A pilot study to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a tailored multicomponent rehabilitation program for Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) cancer survivors. Cancers (Basel), 2025; 17(7):1066.
61.
HaukenMA, HolsenI, FismenE, et al.Working toward a good life as a cancer survivor: A longitudinal study on positive health outcomes of a rehabilitation program for young adult cancer survivors. Cancer Nurs, 2015; 38(1):3–15; doi: 10.1097/ncc.0000000000000138
62.
McDuffeePR, ShiM, DunkerAM, et al.Closing the gap: The need for fertility intervention for young adult cancer survivors. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol, 2025; 14(4):378–382; doi: 10.1089/jayao.2024.0126
63.
LeaS, MartinsA, FernLA, et al.The support and information needs of adolescents and young adults with cancer when active treatment ends. BMC Cancer, 2020; 20(1):697; doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-07197-2
64.
ChanA, ChengI, WangC, et al.Cognitive impairment in adolescent and young adult cancer patients: Pre-treatment findings of a longitudinal study. Cancer Med, 2023; 12(4):4821–4831; doi: 10.1002/cam4.5295
65.
FriisK, LasgaardM, OsborneRH, et al.Gaps in understanding health and engagement with healthcare providers across common long-term conditions: A population survey of health literacy in 29,473 Danish citizens. BMJ Open, 2016; 6(1):e009627; doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009627
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
