Prehabilitation Prior to Major Cancer Surgery: Training for Surgery to Optimize Physiologic Reserve to Reduce Postoperative Complications

Efficacy of Prehabilitation in cancer patients: an Rcts systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer (PwC) who undergo specific treatments reported greater fatigue and reduced functional capacity as predominant outcomes, compromising their QoL during and following the treatment. Prehabilitation intervention, provided after diagnosis and before treatments, is to optimize the physiological reserve and address modifiable risk factors before surgery or chemotherapy to improve post-treatment results. The primary aim of this study is to obtain a common line of efficacy compared with prehabilitation treatment; the secondary endpoint is to assess the methodological quality of the studies eligible in the review.

METHODS

The systematic review was conducted from September to February 2024, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Databases consulted were MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of science and CINAHL, RCTs related to Prehabilitation intervention on PwC were included. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed through the RoB2 Cochrane tool and the PEDro scale. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate relative treatment effects among evaluated outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty-two studies were included in the systematic review, 13 were included in the quantitative analysis. The results of the studies reporting reduced postoperative hospital stay, improved endurance, muscle strength, respiratory function, quality of life, and urinary incontinence. Critical analysis of the articles using the PEDro scale revealed 28 RCTs with a good rating, 9 with a fair rating, and 5 with a poor rating; in contrast, the Cochrane RoB2 tool revealed that all articles were at high risk of bias. Meta-analysis showed statistically significant values for 6MWT (38.53, 95%CI 33.03 - 44.04); HADS-depression (-0.71, 95%CI -0.93 -0.49) and HADS-anxiety (-0.49, 95%CI -0.76 -0.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Prehabilitation represents a specific intervention that aims to improve postoperative outcomes in fragile patients undergoing surgery, increasing their preoperative physiological reserve in anticipation of the stress they will face and facilitating the postoperative recovery of functional capacity. Prehabilitation is a good intervention to use, especially in terms of functional capacity and mental health, the latter being very impactful in terms of reduced levels of anxiety and depression. These data make it possible to justify supportive intervention by physical therapists aimed at improving and restoring health-related QoL especially in the short term.

Embedding Multimodal Rehabilitation Within Routine Cancer Care in Sheffield-The Active Together Service Evaluation Protocol

BACKGROUND

Approximately 3 million people in the United Kingdom are currently living with or beyond cancer. People undergoing treatment for cancer are at risk of complications following treatment. Increasing evidence supports the role of rehabilitation (including prehabilitation) in enhancing psychological and physical well-being in patients with cancer and improving outcomes. Active Together is an evidence-based, multimodal rehabilitation service for patients with cancer, providing support to help patients prepare for and recover from treatment. This paper presents the evaluation protocol for the Active Together service, aiming to determine its impact on patient-reported outcomes and clinical endpoints, as well as understand processes and mechanisms that influence its delivery and outcomes.

METHODS

This evaluation comprises an outcome and process evaluation, with service implementation data integrated into the analysis of outcome measures. The outcome evaluation will assess changes in outcomes of patients that attend the service and compare health care resource use against historical data. The process evaluation will use performance indicators, semistructured interviews, and focus groups to explore mechanisms of action and contextual factors influencing delivery and outcomes. Integrating psychological change mechanisms with outcome data might help to clarify complex causal pathways within the service.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence to support the role of multimodal rehabilitation before, during, and after cancer treatment is increasing. The translation of that evidence into practice is less advanced. Findings from this evaluation will contribute to our understanding of the real-world impact of cancer rehabilitation and strengthen the case for widespread adoption of rehabilitation into routine care for people with cancer.

A Three-Day Prehabilitation Program is Cost-Effective for Preventing Pulmonary Complications after Heart Valve Surgery: A Health Economic Analysis of a Randomized Trial

Background

While prehabilitation (pre surgical exercise) effectively prevents postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), its cost-effectiveness in valve heart disease (VHD) remains unexplored. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a three-day prehabilitation program for reducing PPCs and improving quality adjusted life years (QALYs) in Chinese VHD patients.

Methods

A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial featuring concealed allocation, blinded evaluators, and an intention-to-treat analysis. In total, 165 patients scheduled for elective heart valve surgery at West China Hospital were randomized into intervention and control groups. The intervention group participated in a three-day prehabilitation exercise program supervised by a physiotherapist while the control group received only standard preoperative education. Postoperative hospital costs were audited through the Hospital Information System, and the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire was used to provide a 12-month estimation of QALY. Cost and effect differences were calculated through the bootstrapping method, with results presented in cost-effectiveness planes, alongside the associated cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC). All costs were denominated in Chinese Yuan (CNY) at an average exchange rate of 6.73 CNY per US dollar in 2022.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative hospital costs (8484 versus 9615 CNY, 95% CI -2403 to 140) or in the estimated QALYs (0.909 versus 0.898, 95% CI -0.013 to 0.034) between the intervention and control groups. However, costs for antibiotics (339 versus 667 CNY, 95% CI -605 to -51), nursing (1021 versus 1200 CNY, 95% CI -330 to -28), and electrocardiograph monitoring (685 versus 929 CNY, 95% CI -421 to -67) were significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group. The CEAC indicated that the prehabilitation program has a 92.6% and 93% probability of being cost-effective in preventing PPCs and improving QALYs without incurring additional costs.

Conclusions

While the three-day prehabilitation program did not significantly improve health-related quality of life, it led to a reduction in postoperative hospital resource utilization. Furthermore, it showed a high probability of being cost-effective in both preventing PPCs and improving QALYs in Chinese patients undergoing valve surgery.

Clinical Registration Number

This trial is registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (URL: https://www.chictr.org.cn/) with the registration identifier ChiCTR2000039671.

Exercise capacity prior to major cancer surgery: A cross-sectional observational study of the validity of the 6-minute walk and 30-second sit-to-stand tests

INTRODUCTION

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is the gold standard for measuring exercise capacity, however, it is resource intensive and has limited availability. This study aimed to determine: 1) the association between the 6-min walk test (6MWT) and the 30-s sit-to-stand test (30STS) with CPET peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) and anaerobic threshold (AT) and 2) 6MWT and 30STS cut points associated with a higher risk of postoperative complications.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study, retrospectively analyzing data collected from a tertiary cancer center over a 23-month period. Measures included CPET VO2peak and AT, 6MWT and 30STS test. Correlations were used to characterize relationships between variables. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses determined 6MWT and 30STS cut points that aligned with CPET variable cut points.

RESULTS

Note that, 156 participants were included. The 6MWT and 30STS displayed moderate correlations with VO2peak, rho = 0.65, p = 0.01 and rho = 0.52, p < 0.005 respectively. Fair correlations were observed between AT and 6MWT (rho = 0.36, p = 0.01) and 30STS (rho = 0.41, p < 0.005). The optimal cut points to identify VO2peak < 15 mL/kg/min were 493.5 m on the 6MWT and 12.5 stands on the 30STS test and for AT < 11 mL/kg/min were 506.5 m on the 6MWT and 12.5 stands on the 30STS test.

CONCLUSION

Both the 6MWT and 30STS test could be used as alternative tools for measuring exercise capacity preoperatively in the cancer setting where CPET is not available. A range of 6MWT and 30STS cut points, according to sensitivity and specificity levels, may be used to evaluate risk of postoperative outcomes.

Prehabilitation in Patients With Breast Cancer Receiving Neoadjuvant Therapy to Minimize Musculoskeletal Postoperative Complications and Enhance Recovery (PREOPtimize): A Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to assess the effects of a prehabilitation program (PREOPtimize), consisting of Nordic Walking and resistance training exercises plus health education among patients with breast cancer, who are receiving neoadjuvant therapy to enhance postoperative functionality of the affected arm. A secondary aim will be to compare the short-term effects of the intervention on other patient-reported outcome measures.

METHODS

This will be an assessor-blind, randomized controlled trial with a parallel group design conducted at a tertiary hospital. A sample of 64 patients with breast cancer scheduled for surgery and undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy will be recruited for the trial and randomly allocated to either (1) a prehabilitation program consisting of 2 weekly sessions of 75 minutes of Nordic Walking, muscle strengthening exercises, and health education sessions conducted between the fourth month of treatment and surgery or (2) usual care. Patients in both groups will be assessed at baseline, before surgery, and at 1 and 3 months after surgery. Assessed outcomes include functionality of the affected arm (QuickDash), arm volume, range of motion, handgrip strength, pain, fatigue, functional capacity, physical activity levels, and health-related quality of life. Adherence to the intervention in the prehabilitation group and adverse events will also be recorded.

IMPACT

Prehabilitation for patients affected by breast cancer is rarely implemented in clinical practice. The results obtained with the PREOPtimize trial could show that prehabilitation is a feasible intervention for patients with breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant therapy that might enhance postoperative recovery of upper arm function as well as improve overall physical performance and health-related quality of life.

The Role of Exercise Before Cancer Treatment

OBJECTIVES

We aim to describe on the role of exercise in preparation for cancer treatments (prehabilitation) that include surgery and neoadjuvant or nonsurgical approaches. We discuss the evidence for the role of exercise and provide guidelines to exercise prescription and examples of the structure of prehabilitation exercise programs.

DATA SOURCE

We use peer-reviewed articles obtained through PubMed searches with search terms: exercise, oncology, cancer surgery, exercise physiology, respiratory exercises, prehabilitation, and behavior change.

CONCLUSION

The emergence of prehabilitation in preparing patients for cancer care has followed a rapidly upward trajectory over the past 20 years. Exercise prehabilitation remains the cornerstone of management, particularly in patients attending for major surgery. Multimodal approaches to supporting patients before cancer treatment are now well accepted and include screening and individualized treatments of functional, nutritional, and psychological impairments. Respiratory training before surgery and the addition of behavior change strategies to improve adherence to interventions and promote improved longer-term outcomes are now included in many prehabilitation programs. For exercise to be an effective treatment in improving fitness and strength, supervised aerobic and resistance exercises at moderate intensity are recommended. There remains debate regarding the use of higher-intensity exercise, the appropriate outcome to measure efficacy, and the mechanisms driving the efficacy of exercise.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

We provide background evidence and knowledge pertaining to the role and provision of exercise prehabilitation. Understanding screening, risk factors, and potential efficacy assists in knowing who to refer for prehabilitation and what the programs include. This enables more effective com munication with patients attending for cancer treatments.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Low functional capacity, malnutrition, and anaemia are associated with an increased risk of complications after surgery. These high-risk indicators can be improved through preoperative interventions. The aim of the study was to examine the effect of screening for modifiable high-risk factors combined with targeted interventions on postoperative complications in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery.

Methods

A controlled before-and-after study was conducted including patients with colorectal cancer undergoing elective curative surgery between August 2015 and October 2018, in two institutions (intervention and control hospital). The intervention consisted of a screening for anaemia, low functional capacity, and nutritional status and their implementation (iron supplementation, prehabilitation, nutritional supplements, and consultation with a dietician), for a minimum of 4 weeks before surgery. The primary outcome was a composite measure consisting of unplanned admission to the intensive care unit, complications with Clavien–Dindo score of 3a or above, length of hospital stay less than 10 days, readmission, or death within 30 days during the postoperative course.

Results

A total of 1591 patients were included for analysis with 839 at the intervention hospital and 752 at the control hospital. In a difference-in-difference analysis, adjusted for age, sex, smoking, stage of disease, ASA score, surgical approach, and surgical procedure, the intervention was associated with a 10.9 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 2.1 to 19.7 per cent) absolute risk reduction of a complicated postoperative course, primarily due to a reduction in severe complications.

Conclusion

The combined intervention of screening and prehabilitation was associated with a decreased risk of a complicated course, primarily in a reduction of severe complications.

Implementing a telehealth prehabilitation education session for patients preparing for major cancer surgery

Background

Prehabilitation services assist patients in preparing for surgery, yet access to these services are often limited by geographical factors. Enabling rural and regional patients to access specialist surgical prehabilitation support with the use of telehealth technology has the potential to overcome health inequities and improve post-operative outcomes.

Aim

To evaluate the current and likely future impact of a telehealth preoperative education package for patients preparing for major abdominal cancer surgery.

Methods

A telehealth alternative to a hospital based pre-operative education session was developed and implemented at a dedicated cancer hospital. Adult patients (≥18 years) scheduled for elective major cancer surgery were offered this telehealth alternative. Impact evaluation was conducted using the RE-AIM framework.

Results

To date, 35 participants have consented to participate in the study. Thirty-one participants attended the intervention; 24 (69%) residing in rural or regional areas. Twenty-four (77%) reported that if given a choice they would prefer the online session as opposed to attending the hospital in person. The majority (97%) reported they would recommend the intervention to others preparing for surgery. Session information was recalled by all 26 participants and 77% of participants reported acting on recommendations 2 weeks after the session. Lessons learnt and recommendations for providers implementing similar programs are reported.

Conclusion

Telehealth alternatives to hospital based pre-operative education are well received by patients preparing for major cancer surgery. We make seven recommendations to improve implementation. Further evaluation of implementation strategies alongside clinical effectiveness in future studies is essential.

Trial registration

ACTRN12620000096954, 04/02/2020.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06437-w.

Efficacy of Prehabilitation Including Exercise on Postoperative Outcomes Following Abdominal Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives: This systematic review set out to identify, evaluate and synthesise the evidence examining the effect of prehabilitation including exercise on postoperative outcomes following abdominal cancer surgery. Methods: Five electronic databases (MEDLINE 1946-2020, EMBASE 1947-2020, CINAHL 1937-2020, PEDro 1999-2020, and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials 1991-2020) were systematically searched (until August 2020) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the effects of prehabilitation interventions in patients undergoing abdominal cancer surgery. This review included any form of prehabilitation either unimodal or multimodal that included whole body and/or respiratory exercises as a stand-alone intervention or in addition to other prehabilitation interventions (such as nutrition and psychology) compared to standard care. Results: Twenty-two studies were included in the systematic review and 21 studies in the meta-analysis. There was moderate quality of evidence that multimodal prehabilitation improves pre-operative functional capacity as measured by 6 min walk distance (Mean difference [MD] 33.09 metres, 95% CI 17.69-48.50; p = <0.01) but improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness such as preoperative oxygen consumption at peak exercise (VO2 peak; MD 1.74 mL/kg/min, 95% CI -0.03-3.50; p = 0.05) and anaerobic threshold (AT; MD 1.21 mL/kg/min, 95% CI -0.34-2.76; p = 0.13) were not significant. A reduction in hospital length of stay (MD 3.68 days, 95% CI 0.92-6.44; p = 0.009) was observed but no effect was observed for postoperative complications (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.81, 95% CI 0.55-1.18; p = 0.27), pulmonary complications (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.28-1.01; p = 0.05), hospital re-admission (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.61-1.90; p = 0.81) or postoperative mortality (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.43-2.09, p = 0.90). Conclusion: Multimodal prehabilitation improves preoperative functional capacity with reduction in hospital length of stay. This supports the need for ongoing research on innovative cost-effective prehabilitation approaches, research within large multicentre studies to verify this effect and to explore implementation strategies within clinical practise.

A Pragmatic Non-Randomized Trial of Prehabilitation Prior to Cancer Surgery: Study Protocol and COVID-19-Related Adaptations

Background

Experimental data highlight the potential benefits and health system cost savings related to surgical prehabilitation; however, adequately powered randomized controlled trial (RCT) data remain nascent. Emerging prehabilitation services may be informed by early RCT data but can be limited in informing real-world program development. Pragmatic trials emphasize external validity and generalizability to understand and advise intervention development and implementation in clinical settings. This paper presents the methodology of a pragmatic prehabilitation trial to complement emerging phase III clinical trials and inform implementation strategies.

Methods

This is a pilot pragmatic clinical trial conducted in a large academic hospital in Toronto, Ontario, Canada to assess feasibility of clinical implementation and derive estimates of effectiveness. Feasibility data include program referral rates, enrolment and attrition, intervention adherence and safety, participant satisfaction, and barriers and facilitators to programming. The study aims to receive 150 eligible referrals for adult, English-speaking, preoperative oncology patients with an identified indication for prehabilitation (e.g., frailty, deconditioning, malnutrition, psychological distress). Study participants undergo a baseline assessment and shared-decision making regarding the intervention setting: either facility-based prehabilitation or home-based prehabilitation. In both scenarios, participants receive an individualized exercise prescription, stress-reduction psychological support, nutrition counseling, and protein supplementation, and if appropriate, smoking cessation program referrals. Secondary objectives include estimating intervention effects at the week prior to surgery and 30 and 90 days postoperatively. Outcomes include surgical complications, postoperative length of stay, mortality, hospital readmissions, physical fitness, psychological well-being, and quality of life. Data from participants who decline the intervention but consent for research-related access to health records will serve as comparators. The COVID-19 pandemic required the introduction of a 'virtual program' using only telephone or internet-based communication for screening, assessments, or intervention was introduced.

Conclusion

This pragmatic trial will provide evidence on the feasibility and viability of prehabilitation services delivered under usual clinical conditions. Study amendments due to the COVID-19 pandemic are presented as strategies to maintain prehabilitation research and services to potentially mitigate the consequences of extended surgery wait times.