Acceptability of Online Yoga Among Individuals With Chronic Conditions and Their Caregivers: Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The online delivery of yoga interventions rapidly expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic, and preliminary studies indicate that online yoga is feasible across multiple chronic conditions. However, few yoga studies provide synchronous online yoga sessions and rarely target the caregiving dyad. Online chronic disease management interventions have been evaluated across conditions, life spans, and diverse samples. However, the perceived acceptability of online yoga, including self-reported satisfaction and online delivery preferences, is underexplored among individuals with chronic conditions and their caregivers. Understanding user preferences is essential for successful and safe online yoga implementation. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to qualitatively examine the perceived acceptability of online yoga among individuals with chronic conditions and their caregivers who participated in an online dyadic intervention that merged yoga and self-management education to develop skills (MY-Skills) to manage persistent pain. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study among 9 dyads (>18 years of age; individuals experiencing persistent moderate pain) who participated in MY-Skills online during the COVID-19 pandemic. The intervention consisted of 16 online, synchronous yoga sessions over 8 weeks for both dyad members. After the completion of the intervention, participants (N=18) participated in semistructured telephone interviews for around 20 minutes, discussing their preferences, challenges, and recommendations for improved online delivery. Interviews were analyzed by using a rapid analytic approach. RESULTS: MY-Skills participants were, on average, aged 62.7 (SD 19) years; were primarily women; were primarily White; and had a mean of 5.5 (SD 3) chronic conditions. Both participants and caregivers reported moderate pain severity scores (mean 6.02, SD 1.3) on the Brief Pain Inventory. The following three themes were identified related to online delivery: (1) participants indicated a preference for the intervention to be in person rather than online because they were distracted in the home setting, because they felt that in-person yoga would be more engaging, because the yoga therapist could physically correct positions, and because of safety concerns (eg, fear of falling); (2) participants indicated good acceptability of online MY-Skills delivery due to convenience, access, and comfort with being in their home; and (3) recommendations for improving online delivery highlighted a need for additional and accessible technical support. CONCLUSIONS: Both individuals with chronic conditions and their caregivers find online yoga to be an acceptable intervention. Participants who preferred in-person yoga did so due to distractions in the home and group dynamics. Some participants preferred in-person corrections to ensure correct positioning, while others felt safe with verbal modifications in their homes. Convenience and access were the primary reasons for preferring online delivery. To improve online delivery, future yoga studies should include specific activities for fostering group engagement, enhancing safety protocols, and increasing technical support. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03440320; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03440320.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".