Acceptability and feasibility
A comparison of the number of attended sessions among the participants allocated to each intervention (n = 14 in the BP group and n = 14 in the HW group) is shown in Fig. In terms of satisfaction, each mean score on the satisfaction subscales was equal to or greater than 4 on a scale of 1 to 5 in both interventions, indicating good satisfaction with various aspects of the interventions. No significant differences emerged between the interventions in the comparisons between satisfaction subscale scores. Table 
Means, standard deviations (SD), and comparisons of satisfaction items between interventionsRegarding feasibility, the number of participants who did not start the intervention was comparable between the BP and HW groups (n = 2 in BP and n = 2 in HW, p = 1.000). The reasons for withdrawal were unknown, except for one participant who reported schedule constraints. In the BP, a third participant who had followed two sessions did not complete the second assessment, and in the HW, a third participant who had followed the four sessions did not complete the second assessment.Unhealthy attitudes were monitored during the interventions by the two leaders of the group sessions to prevent interventions from harming the participants. None of the participants had to be excluded because of any harmful effects.