Prehabilitation Before Cancer Treatment

Giles Ceinwen,Cummins Steven

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l5120

2019-01-01

Abstract:A great idea in theory, somewhat trickier in practice

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Prehabilitation and its Outcomes in Cancer Patients: A Narrative Review

A. J. Rajendran,M. A. Raja,S. Benedic Kingslin Suresh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/ijpmr.ijpmr_13_23

2024-01-01

Indian Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Abstract:Abstract Prehabilitation is a multidisciplinary health enhancement programme offered before a disease intervention, such as surgery or chemotherapy/radiotherapy. It is a holistic patient care model that focuses on providing nutritional, psychological and functional care to patients before their intervention. Researchers have found that prehabilitation can improve patient outcomes by preparing for a surgery-associated physiological challenge. While studies have been limited, prehabilitation remains a promising strategy for cancer surgery with potential benefits such as improved outcomes, early recovery and lower hospital stay. The concept of prehabilitation has been growing rapidly, and it aims to enhance a patient’s overall health and well-being before surgery or other therapeutic interventions. Prehabilitation can be a valuable tool for cancer patients, providing advantages such as improved outcomes, early recovery and reduced hospital stay after surgery. However, more evidence is needed to support the effectiveness of prehabilitation. This review paper provides an overview of current knowledge and results of studies on the role of prehabilitation in cancer surgery, highlighting the positive effects of prehabilitation on physical performance, nutritional status, quality of life and sometimes reduced morbidity. Allied interventions, such as cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation, can also provide valuable lessons for prehabilitation in practice. This comprehensive review provides a well-structured and informative presentation, ensuring clarity and ease of understanding for a technical audience. The technical details are well-supported by appropriate references, ensuring accuracy and credibility. Overall, the paper is a thorough and informative review of prehabilitation in cancer patients, outlining key concepts and evidence and providing insights for future research and practice.
From Theory to Practice: An International Approach to Establishing Prehabilitation Programmes

June F. Davis,Stefan J. van Rooijen,Chloe Grimmett,Malcom A. West,Anna M. Campbell,Rashami Awasthi,Gerrit D. Slooter,Michael P. Grocott,Franco Carli,Sandy Jack,June F. Davis,Stefan J. van Rooijen,Chloe Grimmett,Malcom A. West,Anna M. Campbell,Rashami Awasthi,Gerrit D. Slooter,Michael P. Grocott,Franco Carli,Sandy Jack

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40140-022-00516-2

2022-02-18

Current Anesthesiology Reports

Abstract:Abstract Purpose This article focuses on the following: The importance of prehabilitation in people with cancer and the known and hypothesised benefits. Exploration of the principles that can be used when developing services in the absence of a single accepted model of how these services could be established or configured. Description of approaches and learning in the development and implementation of prehabilitation across three different countries: Canada, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, based on the authors’ experiences and perspectives. Recent Findings Practical tips and suggestions are shared by the authors to assist others when implementing prehabilitation programmes. These include experience from three different approaches with similar lessons. Important elements include the following: (i) starting with a small identified clinical group of patients to refine and test the delivery model and demonstrate proof of concept; (ii) systematic data collection with clearly identified target outcomes from the outset; (iii) collaboration with a wide range of stakeholders including those who will be designing, developing, delivering, funding and using the prehabilitation services; (iv) adapting the model to fit local situations; (v) project leaders who can bring together and motivate a team; (vi) recognition and acknowledgement of the value that each member of a diverse multidisciplinary team brings; (vii) involvement of the whole team in prehabilitation prescription including identification of patients’ levels of risk through appropriate assessment and need-based interventions; (viii) persistence and determination in the development of the business case for sustainable funding; (ix) working with patients ambassadors to develop and advocate for the case for support; and (x) working closely with commissioners of healthcare. Summary Principles for the implementation of prehabilitation have been set out by sharing the experiences across three countries. These principles should be considered a framework for those wishing to design and develop prehabilitation services in their own areas to maximise success, effectiveness and sustainability.
Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) Prehabilitation: Advantages and Limitations

Sara Demurtas,Hellas Cena,Marco Benazzo,Paola Gabanelli,Simone Porcelli,Lorenzo Preda,Chandra Bortolotto,Giulia Bertino,Simone Mauramati,Maria Vittoria Veneroni,Ester Orlandi,Anna Maria Camarda,Nagaia Madini,Chiara Annamaria Raso,Laura Deborah Locati

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13206176

2024-10-17

Abstract:Cancer prehabilitation is the process between the time of cancer diagnosis and the beginning of the active acute treatment; prehabilitation consists of various need-based interventions, e.g., physical activity, a nutritional program, and psychological support. It can be delivered as unimodal or multimodal interventions. Physical activity, including resistant exercise and aerobic activities, has to be tailored according to the patient's characteristics; nutritional support is aimed at preventing malnutrition and sarcopenia; while psychological intervention intercepts the patient's distress and supports specific intervention to address it. In addition, multimodal prehabilitation could have a potential impact on the immune system, globally reducing the inflammatory processes and, as a consequence, influencing cancer progression. However, many challenges are still to be addressed, foremost among them the feasibility of prehabilitation programs, the lack of adequate facilities for these programs' implementation, and the fact that not all prehabilitation interventions are reimbursed by the national health system.
Prehabilitation for Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgical Patients: Interim Analysis Demonstrates a Protective Effect From Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Improvement in the Frailty Phenotype

Maria Baimas-George,Michael Watson,Kyle Thompson,Vivek Shastry,David Iannitti,John B Martinie,Erin Baker,Armida Parala-Metz,Dionisios Vrochides

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0003134820952378

Abstract:Background: Prehabilitation encompasses multidisciplinary interventions to improve health and lessen incidence of surgical deterioration by reducing physiologic stress and functional decline. This study presents an interim analysis to demonstrate prehabilitation for hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgical patients. Methods: In 2018, a structured prehabilitation pilot program was implemented. Eligibility required HPB malignancy, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and residence within hour drive. Patients were enrolled into the 4-month program. The fitness component was composed of timed up and go test and grip strength with exercise recommendations. Nutrition involved evaluation of sarcopenic obesity, glucose management, and smoking and alcohol counseling. Psychological services included psychosocial assessments and advanced care planning, with social work referrals. Component were evaluated monthly by a physician using laboratory results, nutritional data and questionnaires, psychological assessments, and validated fitness tests. Nurse navigators spoke with patients weekly to monitor compliance. Results: At 12 months, nineteen patients were enrolled. Ten completed prehabilitation, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and underwent their surgical procedure. There were no differences found after prehabilitation in functional status, physical performance, psychosocial assessments, or nutrition. Frailty, as assessed by Fried frailty criteria, improved significantly after prehabilitation (P < .0001). Symptom severity and laboratory values did not change. Length of stay was 6.5 days and all patients were discharged to home. There was 1 readmission for transient ischemic attack and 90-day mortality rate was 0%. Discussion: Prehabilitation to improve recovery is a promising concept encompassing a wide array of multidisciplinary assessments and interventions. It may demonstrate a protective effect on physiologic decline from chemotherapy and may reverse frailty phenotypes.
Prehabilitation: An Emerging Standard in Exercise Oncology

Nicole L. Stout,Julie K. Silver,Jennifer Baima,Sasha E. Knowlton,Xiaorong Hu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42011-6_6

2020-01-01

Abstract:The benefits of exercise are well articulated across the cancer continuum from the point of diagnosis through end-of-life care. The timepoint from diagnosis until the initiation of antineoplastic treatments, historically dedicated to disease staging and medical treatment planning, is gaining recognition as an important timepoint to introduce exercise interventions. The growing evidence base suggests substantial benefit in physiological markers including pulmonary function, strength, and endurance, preparing individuals with cancer to enter treatment in a healthier state. Furthermore, emerging evidence suggests prehabilitation positively impacts important disease-specific end points, such as adherence to cancer therapeutic modalities, and positively influences surgical and functional outcomes. Cost and utilization benefits are also being elucidated by this growing body of research. Evidence-based exercise interventions, typically delivered as a part of a multimodal care model, range from low to high intensity and include resistive and aerobic components. The prehabilitation time period also enables baseline functional assessment and can facilitate better engagement in proactive exercise and rehabilitative interventions throughout the duration of cancer care, improving function and quality of life for individuals going through cancer treatment.
Feasibility of Prehabilitation Prior to Breast Cancer Surgery: A Mixed-Methods Study

Priya Brahmbhatt,Catherine M. Sabiston,Christian Lopez,Eugene Chang,Jack Goodman,Jennifer Jones,David McCready,Ian Randall,Sarah Rotstein,Daniel Santa Mina

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.571091

IF: 4.7

2020-09-25

Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Breast cancer surgery results in numerous acute and long-term adverse outcomes; the degree to which these can be mitigated or prevented through prehabilitation is unknown.METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal, single-arm, mixed-methods study to examine the feasibility of prehabilitation in 22 women undergoing breast cancer surgery. All participants received an individualized exercise prescription including upper quadrant-specific resistance and mobility training and aerobic exercise for the duration of their surgical wait time. Feasibility was assessed by recruitment, adherence, attrition, and intervention-related adverse event rates. An exploratory investigation of intervention efficacy was conducted via a 6-min walk test, upper-quadrant strength and range of motion, volumetric chances associated with lymphedema, and participant-reported quality of life, fatigue, pain, and disability. Outcome assessments were conducted at baseline, prior to surgery, and at six and 12 weeks after surgery. Semi-structured interviews with a subset of participants (n = 5) and health-care providers (H; n = 2) were conducted to provide further insights about intervention feasibility. Qualitative data were analyzed using a hybrid inductive and deductive thematic analysis approach.RESULTS: Recruitment and attrition rates were 62 and 36%, respectively. Average prehabilitation duration was 31 days (range = 7-69 days). Seventy six percent of participants complied with at least 70% of their prehabilitation prescription. There was a clinically significant increase in the 6-min walk distance from baseline to the preoperative assessment (57 m, 95% CI = -7.52, 121.7). The interviews revealed that the intervention was favorably received by participants and HCPs and included suggestions that prehabilitation (i) should be offered to all surgical candidates, (ii) is an avenue to regain control in the preoperative period, (iii) is a facilitator of postoperative recovery, and (iv) is an opportunity to provide education regarding postoperative rehabilitation protocols. A preference for multimodal prehabilitation (including dietetic and psychological counseling) was also highlighted.CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that surgical prehabilitation in women with breast cancer is feasible. Data are hampered by study sample size and lack of a control group. Thus, randomized controlled trials to examine prehabilitation efficacy in people with breast cancer, especially interventions employing a multimodal strategy, are warranted.

oncology
Optimizing Prehabilitation in Gynecologic Malignancies: Improving Acceptance, Overcoming Barriers, and Managing Program Complexity

Alexandra Mayer,David Cibula

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108739

IF: 4.037

2024-10-04

European Journal of Surgical Oncology

Abstract:Prehabilitation aims to improve patients' physical condition before a stressful event, such as surgery, and enhance recovery. Despite its potential benefits, many emerging prehabilitation programs face challenges in enrolling or retaining patients. In our prehabilitation study PHOCUS, which aims to prepare ovarian cancer patients for surgery, we have also encountered lower acceptance and retention rates. Particularly the most vulnerable patients, who are old and frail, and may benefit the most from the prehabilitation, decline participation due to the complexity of the proposed program.In our review we discussed obstacles and barriers that prevent patients' participation based on both literature and our experience. Among the main reasons are patient's low motivation, high intensity of the program and a lack of social support. To overcome these challenges, we suggest increasing the program's flexibility, adapting the program according to individual patient's needs and enhancing patients' education about the benefits of prehabilitation.

oncology,surgery
Acceptability of prehabilitation for cancer surgery: a multi-perspective qualitative investigation of patient and 'clinician' experiences

Rachael Powell,Amy Davies,Kirsty Rowlinson-Groves,David P French,John Moore,Zoe Merchant

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-023-10986-0

IF: 4.638

2023-08-11

BMC Cancer

Abstract:Background: 'Prehabilitation' interventions aim to enhance individuals' physical fitness prior to cancer treatment, typically involve exercise training as a key component, and may continue to support physical activity, strength, and fitness during or after treatment. However, uptake of prehabilitation is variable. This study investigated how patients from diverse socio-economic status groups perceived an exemplar prehabilitation and recovery programme, aiming to understand factors impacting acceptability, engagement and referral. Methods: This research was conducted in the context of the Prehab4Cancer and Recovery Programme, a prehabilitation and recovery programme available across Greater Manchester, UK. Qualitative, semi-structured phone/video-call interviews were conducted with 18 adult patient participants referred to the programme (16 'engagers', 2 'non-engagers'; half the sample lived in localities with low socio-economic status scores). An online questionnaire with free-response and categorical-response questions was completed by 24 'clinician' participants involved in referral (nurses, doctors and other staff roles). An inductive, multi-perspective, thematic analysis was performed, structured using the Framework approach. Results: Discussing and referring patients to prehabilitation can be challenging due to large quantities of information for staff to cover, and for patients to absorb, around the time of diagnosis. The programme was highly valued by both participant groups; the belief that participation would improve recovery seemed a major motivator for engagement, and some 'clinicians' felt that prehabilitation should be treated as a routine part of treatment, or extended to support other patient groups. Engagers seemed to appreciate a supportive approach where they did not feel forced to do any activity and tailoring of the programme to meet individual needs and abilities was appreciated. Initial engagement could be daunting, but gaining experience with the programme seemed to increase confidence. Conclusions: The prehabilitation programme was highly valued by engagers. Introducing prehabilitation at a challenging time means that personalised approaches might be needed to support engagement, or participation could be encouraged at a later time. Strategies to support individuals lacking in confidence, such as buddying, may be valuable. Study registration: The study protocol was uploaded onto the Open Science Framework 24 September 2020 ( https://osf.io/347qj/ ).
Prehabilitation Before Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery: Protocol for an Implementation Study

Kristy-Lee Raso,Michael Suen,Jane Turner,Sonia Khatri,Yanlan Lin,Carolyn Wildbore,Guillermo Becerril-Martinez,Philip Le Page,Sim Yee Tan,Sam Egger,Janette Vardy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/41101

2023-03-28

JMIR Research Protocols

Abstract:Background: Surgery remains the standard curative treatment for early-stage colorectal and upper gastrointestinal cancer. Reduced preoperative functional capacity, nutritional status, and psychological well-being are associated with poor postoperative outcomes. Prehabilitation aims to improve preoperative functional reserves through physical, nutritional, and psychological interventions. Yet, how it transitions from a trial setting to being integrated into a real-world health setting is unknown. Objective: The primary aim is to evaluate the implementation of a multimodal (supervised exercise, nutrition, and nursing support) prehabilitation program into standard care for patients with gastrointestinal cancer (colorectal and upper gastrointestinal cancer) scheduled for curative intent surgery. The secondary aim is to determine the impact of a multimodal prehabilitation program on functional capacity, nutritional and psychological status, and surgical outcomes. Methods: This is an implementation study that will investigate a multimodal prehabilitation intervention, in a nonblinded, nonrandomized, single-group, pre-post design. Patients diagnosed with colorectal and upper gastrointestinal cancer scheduled for potentially curative intent surgery at Concord Repatriation General Hospital, with ≥14 intervention days prior to surgery and are medically cleared to exercise will be eligible. The study will be evaluated using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance Evaluation Framework. Results: The protocol was approved in December 2019 by the Concord Repatriation General Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (reference number 2019/PID13679). Recruitment commenced in January 2020. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, recruitment was paused in March 2020 and reopened in August 2020 with remote or telehealth intervention adaptations. Recruitment ended on December 31, 2021. Over the 16-month recruitment period, a total of 77 participants were recruited. Conclusions: Prehabilitation represents an opportunity to maximize functional capacity and improve surgical outcomes. The study will provide guidance and contribute to the evidence on the integration of prehabilitation into standard care using adaptive models of health care delivery including telehealth. Trial Registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTR 12620000409976; https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=378974&isReview=true
Pragmatic Approaches to Scalable Prehabilitation

Jessica Engle

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2024.01.013

IF: 5.952

2024-02-18

European Urology Focus

Abstract:Patients with cancer should ideally undergo proactive screening for muscle wasting, dietary deficiencies, functional changes, and/or psychological needs. Alternatively, a cross-referral strategy may be useful. A multimodal prehabilitation approach can address impairments and optimize function before treatment. Urological prehabilitation has led to improvements in lean body mass, bone density, erectile function, and urinary continence.

urology & nephrology
Prehabilitation in the lung cancer pathway: a scoping review

Kelly Wade-Mcbane,Alex King,Catherine Urch,Julian Jeyasingh-Jacob,Andrew Milne,Clair Le Boutillier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-023-11254-x

IF: 4.638

2023-08-11

BMC Cancer

Abstract:Background: Lung cancer is the third most common type of cancer in the UK. Treatment outcomes are poor and UK deaths from lung cancer are higher than any other cancer. Prehabilitation has shown to be an important means of preparing patients both physically and psychologically for cancer treatment. However, little is understood about the context and mechanisms of prehabilitation that can impact physiological and psychological wellbeing. Our aim was to review and summarise primary research on prehabilitation in the lung cancer pathway using a realist approach. Methods: A scoping review of empirical primary research was conducted. Five online medical databases from 2016 - February 2023 were searched. All articles reporting on prehabilitation in lung cancer were included in the review. For this review, prehabilitation was defined as either a uni-modal or multi-modal intervention including exercise, nutrition and/or psychosocial support within a home, community or hospital based setting. A realist framework of context, mechanism and outcome was used to assist with the interpretation of findings. Results: In total, 31 studies were included in the review, of which, three were published study protocols. Over 95% of studies featured an exercise component as part of a prehabilitation programme. Twenty-six of the studies had a surgical focus. Only two studies reported using theory to underpin the design of this complex intervention. There was large heterogeneity across all studies as well as a lack of clinical trials to provide definitive evidence on the programme design, setting, type of intervention, patient criteria, delivery, duration and outcome measures used. Conclusion: A standardised prehabilitation programme for lung cancer patients does not yet exist. Future lung cancer prehabilitation programmes should take into account patient led values, needs, goals, support structures and beliefs, as these factors can affect the delivery and engagement of interventions. Future research should consider using a conceptual framework to conceptualise the living with and beyond cancer experience to help shape and inform personalised prehabilitation services.
Prehabilitation programs for individuals with cancer: a systematic review of randomized-controlled trials

Jose F. Meneses-Echavez,Andrés F. Loaiza-Betancur,Víctor Díaz-López,Andrés M. Echavarría-Rodríguez,Héctor Reynaldo Triana-Reina

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02373-4

2023-11-17

Systematic Reviews

Abstract:Abstract Background Prehabilitation programs focusing on exercise training as the main component are known as a promising alternative for improving patients’ outcomes before cancer surgery. This systematic review determined the benefits and harms of prehabilitation programs compared with usual care for individuals with cancer. Methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE from inception to June 2022, and hand searched clinical trial registries. We included randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) in adults, survivors of any type of cancer, that compared prehabilitation programs that had exercise training as the major component with usual care or other active interventions. Outcome measures were health-related quality of life (HRQL), muscular strength, postoperative complications, average length of stay (ALOS), handgrip strength, and physical activity levels. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence. Results Twenty-five RCTs (2682 participants) published between 2010 and 2022 met our inclusion criteria. Colorectal and lung cancers were the most common diagnoses. The studies had methodological concerns regarding outcome measurement, selective reporting, and attrition. Five prehabilitation programs were compared to usual care (rehabilitation): combined training, aerobic training, respiratory muscle training plus aerobic training, respiratory muscle training plus resistance training, and pelvic floor training. The studies provided no clear evidence of an effect between groups. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence as very low, downgraded due to serious study limitations and imprecision. Conclusion Prehabilitation programs focusing on exercise training may have an effect on adults with cancer, but the evidence is very uncertain. We have very little confidence in the results and the true effect is likely to be substantially different from these. Further research is needed before we can draw a more certain conclusion. Systematic review registration CRD42019125658.

medicine, general & internal
Early prehabilitation reduces admissions and time in hospital in patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer

Iain Phillips,Maria Deans,Abi Walton,Mahéva Vallet,Julie Mencnarowksi,Debbie McMillan,Catriona Peacock,Peter Hall,Fiona O’Brien,Mark Stares,Melanie Mackean,Tracie Plant,Robert Grecian,Lindsey Allan,Rebecca Petrie,Duncan Blues,Suraiya Haddad,Colin Barrie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/spcare-2024-004869

IF: 4.6332

2024-04-17

BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care

Abstract:Objectives Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the UK. Prehabilitation aims to maximise patient fitness and minimise the negative impact of anticancer treatment. What constitutes prehabilitation before non-surgical anticancer treatment is not well established. We present data from a pilot project of Early prehabilitation In lung Cancer. Methods All new patients with likely advanced lung cancer were offered prehabilitation at respiratory clinic, if fit for further investigation. Prehabilitation included assessment and appropriate intervention from a consultant in palliative medicine, registered dietitian and rehabilitation physiotherapist. Four objective endpoints were identified, namely admissions to hospital, time spent in the hospital, treatment rates and overall survival. Outcomes were to be compared with 178 prehab eligible historical controls diagnosed from 2019 to 2021. Results From July 2021 to June 2023, 65 patients underwent prehabilitation and 72% of patients underwent all 3 interventions. 54 patients had a stage 3 or 4 lung cancer. In the prehab group, fewer patients attended Accident and Emergency (31.5 vs 37.4 attendances per 100 patients) and fewer were admitted (51.9 vs 67.9) when compared with historical controls. Those receiving prehab spent a lot less time in the hospital (129.7 vs 543.5 days per 100 patients) with shorter admissions (2.5 vs 8 days). Systemic anticancer treatment rates increased in the short term but were broadly similar overall. Median survival was higher in the prehabilitation group (0.73 vs 0.41 years, p=0.046). Conclusions Early prehabilitation appears to reduce time spent in the hospital. It may improve survival. Further work is required to understand its full effect on treatment rates.

health care sciences & services
The Role of Exercise Before Cancer Treatment

Linda Denehy,Lara Edbrooke

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soncn.2022.151330

Abstract: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.
The Impact of Prehabilitation Interventions on Affective and Functional Outcomes for Young to Midlife Adult Cancer Patients: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Pamela Gallagher,Aideen Ms. Scriney,Amy Ms. Russell,Lisa Dr. Loughney,Lorraine Dr. Boran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.6029

2022-09-09

Abstract:Objective Cancer remains one of the most enduring health crises of the modern world. Prehabilitation is a relatively new intervention aimed at preparing individuals for the stresses associated with treatment from diagnosis. Prehabilitation can include exercise, psychological and nutrition‐based interventions. The present systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy of prehabilitation on affective and functional outcomes for young to midlife adult cancer patients (18‐55 years). Outcomes of interest included prehabilitation programme composition, duration, mode of delivery and measures used to determine impact on affective and functional outcomes. Methods The following databases were searched with controlled and free text vocabulary; PsychINFO, CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed. and full ‐text screening was conducted with a secondary reviewer and final texts were subject to risk of bias analysis. Results Thirteen texts were included at full‐text. These included data of 797 prehabilitation participants (mean age 53 years) and a large representation of female participants (71% average). Evidence was found for the efficacy of psychological prehabilitation for anxiety reduction. Prehabilitation did not significantly affect health related quality of life (HrQoL). Findings moderately supported the therapeutic validity of exercise prehabilitation for functional outcomes , both in terms of clinical and experimental improvement with respect to the quality of evidence. Variation between all prehabilitation types was observed. There was insufficient evidence to support the efficacy of psychological prehabilitation on stress, distress or depression. Conclusion Implications for future research are highlighted and then discussed with respect to this young to midlife age group. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

oncology,social sciences, biomedical,psychology, multidisciplinary
Prehabilitation in rectal surgery: a narrative review

E Hannan,M E Kelly,M R Fahy,D C Winter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-021-04092-5

Abstract:Aim: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACRT) can make decompensated patients more vulnerable prior to rectal surgery. Prehabilitation is an intervention which enhances functional capacity to withstand the stress of surgery. The aim of this review was to evaluate the impact of prehabilitation for patients undergoing rectal surgery on physical fitness and clinical outcomes and to establish feasibility of prehabilitation. Methods: An analysis of the literature was conducted of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and ScienceDirect. Articles were initially included based on their title and abstracts reviewed. Full-text copies of those selected were obtained for confirmation of inclusion. Results: Eight studies were included. Heterogenicity was observed in the structure of exercise programmes. Improvements in physical fitness were observed in six studies. One study demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in quality of life. The prehabilitation programmes were shown to be feasible, with high completion rates. No adverse events were reported. There was limited data regarding the impact of prehabilitation on postoperative outcomes. Conclusion: Current evidence on prehabilitation in rectal surgery has considerable heterogenicity in both structure of programmes and outcome measures. Standardisation is required for future evaluation of the impact on outcomes. A trimodal approach of exercise, nutritional and psychological interventions has been employed in similar programmes, and should be used in rectal surgery. The intervention should be tailored to the patient and environment. This review highlights the benefits, safety and feasibility of prehabilitation and provides a platform for consensus-building for international trials.
Can we "prehabilitate" pancreatic cancer patients prior to surgery?A critical appraisal of the literature

Mina Refaat,Shreeyash Modak,Chidananda Harivelam,Shahid Ullah,Katia Ferrar,Sunil Pandya,Pradeep Rebala,G V Rao,Hans D de Boer,Savio George Barreto,Monish Karunakaran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnesp.2024.08.003

2024-08-21

Abstract:Background: Enhancing a patient's functional capacity to withstand the surgical stress by means of multimodal (combined exercise, nutrition and psychological interventions) prehabilitation may potentially lead to improved outcomes in pancreatic cancer surgery. Methodology: A systematic review was undertaken searching PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library databases, exploring the impact of prehabilitation in pancreatic surgery. Outcomes of interest were adherence to the prehabilitation, functional capacity, overall complications and post-operative length of stay. Pooled analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Results: Twelve studies comprising of 1497 patients were included in the review. Most of the studies seem to lack a multimodal approach. Less than 50 % of the studies reported adherence, which ranged between 27 to 100 %. Functional capacity, in terms of 6-minute walk test, showed improvement with prehabilitation. Among the post-operative outcomes, prehabilitation was associated with significant improvement in pulmonary complications (2.4 % versus 6.7 %, RR 0.36, CI 0.17-0.74, p= 0.01, I2= 28%). Prehabilitation was not effective in terms of length of stay or readmission rates. Conclusions: Larger studies with multimodal prehabilitation approaches may demonstrate more consistent and clinically meaningful benefits, which would lead to a firm appreciation of its role the management of pancreatic cancer patients undergoing surgery.
Experiences of Patients with Breast Cancer Participating in a Prehabilitation Program: A Qualitative Study

Anabel Casanovas-Álvarez,Raquel Sebio-Garcia,Jaume Masià,Ester Mateo-Aguilar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133732

2024-06-26

Abstract:Background: Breast cancer (BC) is the most prevalent cancer diagnosis among women worldwide. Several randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews have shown the benefits of exercise before, during, and after cancer treatment to manage side effects related to cancer and its therapies. However, these are poorly implemented across the disease-span, specifically, during the preoperative setting. Methods: Patients diagnosed with BC and participating in a randomized controlled trial on the effects of a prehabilitation program based on Nordic walking, muscle strengthening, and therapeutic education were invited to participate in this qualitative substudy. Two groups of eight patients each were recorded, transcript and analyzed using a specialized software (Atlas-Ti®, version 24). Results: During the axial codification phase, 22 unique codes and 6 main themes were identified related to their experience with the program, namely, (1) information received prior to participating; (2) motivation to participate; (3) barriers; (4) facilitators; (5) perceived degree of support from healthcare workers as well as peers; and (6) satisfaction with the characteristics of the prehabilitation program. Conclusions: Patients interviewed showed great interest in prehabilitation as a way to prepare both physically and mentally for surgery. In order to implement these interventions, healthcare systems need to acknowledge barriers and facilitators as well as the need for these programs to be supervised and monitored to avoid adverse events.
Prehabilitation in patients awaiting acute inpatient cardiac surgery: a pilot Study

Sarah Raut,Aaron Hales,Maureen Twiddy,Lili Dixon,Dumbor Ngaage,David Yates,Gerard Danjoux,Lee Ingle

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.07.12.24309975

2024-07-12

Abstract:Background: The concept of “prehabilitation,” or optimising individual physical and mental wellbeing prior to surgery is well established in cancer and orthopaedic populations. However, amongst the cardiac surgery population, the concept is relatively new. Of the few studies available, all focus on the elective surgical population. This pilot feasibility trial is novel as it will focus on the impact of multimodal prehabilitation on the acute inpatient cardiac surgical population. Methods: This single centre, prospective, single arm pilot feasibility trial will recruit 20 inpatients awaiting cardiac surgery. Measurements will be collected at the start of the trial (baseline), 7 days after intervention, and 14 days after the intervention or before the day of surgery. The primary outcome measure will be feasibility and practicality of the programme in an acute inpatient population. We will be looking into participant eligibility, acceptability, recruitment rates, completion rates and barriers to implementing a prehabilitation programme. Secondary outcomes include incidence of study-related adverse events, improvement in 6 minutes walk test (6MWT), hand grip strength, quality of life, anxiety scores and spirometry. At the end of the trial, we will be seeking the feedback of the participants on key components of the programme to help us inform future work. We hypothesise that light to moderate structured exercise training is low risk and feasible in patients awaiting inpatient cardiac surgery. The study was approved by Health Research Authority and Heath and Care Research Wales (Yorkshire & the Humber- Bradford Leeds Research Ethics Committee: REC reference 23/YH/0255) on the 8th November 2023. Discussion: Multimodal prehabilitation could improve individual physical and mental wellbeing whilst awaiting inpatient cardiac surgery. Prehabilitation can provide individuals with a sense of ownership and control over their condition, improve their motivation and independence, and enhance their mental and physical recovery after surgery. Traditionally, patients waiting for cardiac surgery are discouraged from physical activity/ structured exercise training and receive limited information regarding their health. Appropriate physical and psychological support could improve their confidence to mobilise sooner after surgery. This may then facilitate earlier discharge leading to improved hospital bed utilisation and patient flow.
A Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial of Prehabilitation During Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Women with Breast Cancer: A Mixed Methods Study

Priya Brahmbhatt,Nicole J. Look Hong,Apishanthi Sriskandarajah,Nasrin Alavi,Sarah Selvadurai,David Berger-Richardson,Sharon Lemon-Wong,Joanna Mascarenhas,Leslie Gibson,Tracey Rapier,Elie Isenberg-Grzeda,Lori J. Bernstein,Daniel Santa Mina,Frances C. Wright

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-023-14851-z

IF: 4.339

2024-01-13

Annals of Surgical Oncology

Abstract:BackgroundLimited data exist regarding the role of multimodal prehabilitation during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for breast cancer. Determining large trial feasibility and identifying signals of prehabilitation benefit are needed.Patients and MethodsWe conducted a randomized controlled feasibility trial of multimodal prehabilitation versus usual care during NACT among women diagnosed with non-metastatic breast cancer. Intervention participants received an individualized exercise program, dietetic support, and stress management counseling during NACT. The trial assessed feasibility via rates of recruitment, attrition, adherence, and study-related adverse events. Physical fitness (Six Minute Walk Test, grip strength, anthropometrics) and patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline, after NACT completion, and 6 months after surgery as exploratory outcomes, and analyzed using linear mixed effects models. Qualitative data were collected from a subsample to understand feasibility and acceptability of prehabilitation.ResultsA total of 72 participants were enrolled from the 123 eligible patients (recruitment rate of 53%). There was a 13% attrition rate and no intervention-related adverse events. Participants in the prehabilitation group had better 6-min walk distance at the post-chemotherapy timepoint [between group difference of 49.43 m, 95% confidence interval (CI) − 118.1, 19.2] and at the post-surgery timepoint (27.3, 95% CI −96.8, 42.2) compared with the control group. Prehabilitation participants reported better quality of life, less fatigue, and improved physical activity levels compared with usual care participants. Interviews revealed that the intervention had a positive impact on the treatment experience.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated feasibility and improvement in physical and psychosocial outcomes. Larger trials assessing intervention efficacy to confirm indications of prehabilitation benefit are warranted.

oncology,surgery

Prehabilitation Before Cancer Treatment

Prehabilitation and its Outcomes in Cancer Patients: A Narrative Review

From Theory to Practice: An International Approach to Establishing Prehabilitation Programmes

Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) Prehabilitation: Advantages and Limitations

Prehabilitation for Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgical Patients: Interim Analysis Demonstrates a Protective Effect From Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Improvement in the Frailty Phenotype

Prehabilitation: An Emerging Standard in Exercise Oncology

Feasibility of Prehabilitation Prior to Breast Cancer Surgery: A Mixed-Methods Study

Optimizing Prehabilitation in Gynecologic Malignancies: Improving Acceptance, Overcoming Barriers, and Managing Program Complexity

Acceptability of prehabilitation for cancer surgery: a multi-perspective qualitative investigation of patient and 'clinician' experiences

Prehabilitation Before Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery: Protocol for an Implementation Study

Pragmatic Approaches to Scalable Prehabilitation

Prehabilitation in the lung cancer pathway: a scoping review

Prehabilitation programs for individuals with cancer: a systematic review of randomized-controlled trials

Early prehabilitation reduces admissions and time in hospital in patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer

The Role of Exercise Before Cancer Treatment

The Impact of Prehabilitation Interventions on Affective and Functional Outcomes for Young to Midlife Adult Cancer Patients: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Prehabilitation in rectal surgery: a narrative review

Can we "prehabilitate" pancreatic cancer patients prior to surgery?A critical appraisal of the literature

Experiences of Patients with Breast Cancer Participating in a Prehabilitation Program: A Qualitative Study

Prehabilitation in patients awaiting acute inpatient cardiac surgery: a pilot Study

A Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial of Prehabilitation During Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Women with Breast Cancer: A Mixed Methods Study