Considerations for multimodal prehabilitation in women with gynaecological cancers: a scoping review using realist principles

Prehabilitation Consultation on Self-Care and Physical Exercise in Patients Diagnosed with Abdominopelvic Cancer: Protocol of the Study

BACKGROUND

Introduction: Prehabilitation in the field of oncology has been defined as "the process in the continuum of care that occurs between diagnosis and the start of treatment involving physical and psychological measures that determine the patient's baseline functional status."

AIM

To determine the effectiveness of a Prehabilitation consultation on self-care and targeted physical exercise for patients diagnosed with abdominopelvic cancer.

DESIGN

An observational study that will evaluate the pre-post efficacy of an ad-hoc designed Prehabilitation intervention. The study population consists of patients diagnosed with colon or gynecological cancer with a surgical indication as part of their therapeutic plan from the General Surgery Services. It is configured around four key interventions: (a) health education and self-care, (b) specific nutritional counseling, (c) initial psychological assessment, and (d) directed physical exercise intervention. Health education, self-care interventions, and physical exercise will be carried out weekly from diagnosis to the scheduled surgery day.

RESULTS

Aspects such as self-care capacity or agency, perioperative anxiety, aerobic capacity, strength and flexibility, postoperative complications, and recovery time to adjuvant treatment will be measured using tools such as Appraisal of self-care agency scale (ASA), State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), walking test, sit and Reach, Hand Grip or Squad Jump.

CONCLUSION

Utilizing validated tools for analyzing selected variables will contribute to refining and expanding care guidelines, ultimately enhancing support for both patients and their caregivers.

The acceptability of exercise prehabilitation before cancer surgery among patients, family members and health professionals: a mixed methods evaluation

PURPOSE

Exercise prehabilitation aims to increase preoperative fitness, reduce post-operative complications, and improve health-related quality of life. For prehabilitation to work, access to an effective programme which is acceptable to stakeholders is vital. The aim was to explore acceptability of exercise prehabilitation before cancer surgery among key stakeholders specifically patients, family members and healthcare providers.

METHODS

A mixed-methods approach (questionnaire and semi-structured interview) underpinned by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability was utilised. Composite acceptability score, (summation of acceptability constructs and a single-item overall acceptability construct), and median of each construct was calculated. Correlation analysis between the single-item overall acceptability and each construct was completed. Qualitative data was analysed using deductive and inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

244 participants completed the questionnaire and n=31 completed interviews. Composite acceptability was comparable between groups (p=0.466). Four constructs positively correlated with overall acceptability: affective attitude (r=0.453), self-efficacy (r=0.399), ethicality (r=0.298) and intervention coherence (r=0.281). Qualitative data confirmed positive feelings, citing psychological benefits including a sense of control. Participants felt flexible prehabilitation program would be suitable for everyone, identifying barriers and facilitators to reduce burden.

CONCLUSION

Exercise prehabilitation is highly acceptable to key stakeholders. Despite some burden, it is a worthwhile and effective intervention. Stakeholders understand its purpose, are confident in patients' ability to participate, and regard it is an important intervention contributing to patients' psychological and physical wellbeing.

IMPLICATIONS

•Introduction should be comprehensively designed and clearly presented, providing appropriate information and opportunity for questions. •Programmes should be patient-centred, designed to overcome barriers and address patients' specific needs and goals. •Service must be appropriately resourced with a clear referral-pathway.

Prehabilitation for Patients with Cancer Undergoing Radiation Therapy: a Scoping Review

AIMS

Prehabilitation is a process of identifying and assessing factors that could compromise the physical and psychological health of patients undergoing cancer treatment and implementing an intervention to combat such concerns. The use of prehabilitation in cancer surgery has yielded positive outcomes in rectal, lung and abdominal cancers. Prehabilitation strategies have potential to improve the management of patients receiving radiation therapy or chemoradiation. The aim of the present study was to map the evidence of the assessment and evaluation of prehabilitation for radiation therapy patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A database search using EMBASE and PubMed was conducted. The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to. Keywords included prehabilitation, radiation therapy/radiotherapy, chemoradiotherapy/chemoradiation, intervention and exercise. Types of prehabilitation strategy, their purposes and impact, according to cancer site, were analysed.

RESULTS

Prehabilitation is most commonly evaluated in head and neck cancer, whereby unimodal, physical interventions manage dysphagia. Prehabilitation for lung cancer demonstrated its ability to widen treatment options for patients. Physical prehabilitation is administered to combat adverse effects of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in patients with rectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

Prehabilitation is adaptive and tailored to specific patient and site needs; thus it is applied across a wide range of cancer sites. More interventions by which radiation therapy is the definitive treatment modality and larger sample sizes within these studies are warranted to increase prehabilitation utilisation for patients undergoing radiation therapy.

Assessing real-world implementability of a multimodal group-based tele-prehabilitation program in cancer care: a pragmatic feasibility study

Introduction

Multimodal prehabilitation is intended to optimize a patient's mental and physical health prior to surgery. Most multimodal prehabilitation interventions are delivered on a one-on-one format, which may limit benefits associated with social interactions that can be achieved in a group context, and are delivered in-person, which may limit the accessibility. The purpose of this study was to develop a group-based, multimodal, tele-prehabilitation intervention for individuals diagnosed with cancer (iACTIF) and assess its implementability in a "real-world" clinical setting by measuring feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, and preliminary effects.

Methods

A prospective, single-group, pragmatic feasibility study was conducted with assessments at baseline, pre-surgery, and 12-weeks post-surgery. iACTIF consisted of three 90-min live videoconference sessions per week, including exercise and educational components. Descriptive statistics were used to document feasibility, acceptability, and fidelity indicators. Paired t-test, Wilcoxon test, and Cohen's D-test were conducted to assess changes in health-related outcomes.

Results

A total of 25 participants (mean age ± SD= 60.2 ± 14.0) were recruited. The feasibility assessment revealed a low referral rate (31.4%) and a high study retention (98%) and program attendance [session attended/possible session] (70.2%), with a prehabilitation window of 32.7 days (SD= 20.9, median= 28). Acceptability was high (84%-100%) according to satisfaction, utility and safety, delivery modality, and intention to continue physical activity and to recommend iACTIF to a relative. Pre-post-intervention assessments suggest positive changes on physical functional capacity based on the 2-min step test (mean difference= +18.9 steps, p=0.005), the 30-s sit-to-stand (mean difference= +1.1 repetition, p=0.011), and volume of moderate intensity physical activity per week (mean difference= +104.8 min, p<0.001). Fidelity was supported by conformity and coherence, with only minimal adjustments required to meet participants' needs.

Discussion

iACTIF implementability in a "real-world" clinical setting is promising, and preliminary outcomes suggest moderate benefits on physical health and small increase in mental health indicators.