Evidence base for exercise prehabilitation suggests favourable outcomes for patients undergoing surgery for non-small cell lung cancer despite being of low therapeutic quality: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Prehabilitation in Adults Undergoing Cancer Surgery: A Comprehensive Review on Rationale, Methodology, and Measures of Effectiveness

Cancer surgery places a significant burden on a patients' functional status and quality of life. In addition, cancer surgery is fraught with postoperative complications, themselves influenced by a patient's functional status. Prehabilitation is a unimodal or multimodal strategy that aims to increase a patient's functional capacity to reduce postoperative complications and improve postoperative recovery and quality of life. In most cases, it involves exercise, nutrition, and anxiety-reducing interventions. The impact of prehabilitation has been explored in several types of cancer surgery, most commonly colorectal and thoracic. Overall, the existing evidence suggests prehabilitation improves physiological outcomes (e.g., lean body mass, maximal oxygen consumption) as well as clinical outcomes (e.g., postoperative complications, quality of life). Notably, the benefit of prehabilitation is additional to that of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs. While safe, prehabilitation programs require multidisciplinary coordination preoperatively. Despite the existence of numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses, the certainty of evidence demonstrating the efficacy and safety of prehabilitation is low to moderate, principally due to significant methodological heterogeneity and small sample sizes. There is a need for more large-scale multicenter randomized controlled trials to draw strong clinical recommendations.

Cardio-oncology rehabilitation: are we ready?

Cardio-oncology rehabilitation (CORE) is not only an essential component of cancer rehabilitation but also a pillar of preventive cardio-oncology. Cardio-oncology rehabilitation is a comprehensive model based on a multitargeted approach and its efficacy has been widely documented; when compared with an 'exercise only' programme, comprehensive CORE demonstrates a better outcome. It involves nutritional counselling, psychological support, and cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment, and it is directed to a very demanding population with a heavy burden of CV diseases driven by physical inactivity, cancer therapy-induced metabolic derangements, and cancer therapy-related CV toxicities. Despite its usefulness, CORE is still underused in cancer patients and we are still at the dawning of remote models of rehabilitation (tele-rehabilitation). Not all CORE is created equally: a careful screening procedure to identify patients who will benefit the most from CORE and a multidisciplinary customized approach are mandatory to achieve a better outcome for cancer survivors throughout their cancer journey. The aim of this paper is to provide an updated review of CORE not only for cardiologists dealing with this peculiar population of patients but also for oncologists, primary care providers, patients, and caregivers. This multidisciplinary team should help cancer patients to maintain a healthy and active life before, during, and after cancer treatment, in order to improve quality of life and to fight health inequities.

Cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation of elderly frail or pre-frail patients prior to elective surgery (PRAEP-GO) versus usual care - Protocol for a health economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Prehabilitation aims to improve patients' functional capacity before surgery to reduce perioperative complications, promote recovery and decrease probability of disability. The planned economic evaluation is performed alongside a large German multi-centre pragmatic, two-arm parallel-group, randomized controlled trial on prehabilitation for frail elderly patients before elective surgery compared to standard care (PRAEP-GO RCT). The aim is to determine the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of prehabilitation for frail elderly before an elective surgery.

METHODS

The planned health economic evaluation comprises cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility analyses. Analyses are conducted in the German context from different perspectives including the payer perspective, i.e. the statutory health insurance, the societal perspective and the health care provider perspective. Data on outcomes and costs, are collected alongside the ongoing PRAEP-GO RCT. The trial population includes frail or pre-frail patients aged ≥70 years with planned elective surgery. The intervention consists of frailty screening (Fried phenotype), a shared decision-making conference determining modality (physiotherapy and unsupervised physical exercises, nutrition counselling, etc.) and setting (inpatient, day care, outpatient etc.) of a 3-week individual multimodal prehabilitation prior to surgery. The control group receives standard preoperative care. Costs include the intervention costs, the costs of the index hospital stay for surgery, and health care resources consumed during a 12-month follow-up. Clinical effectiveness outcomes included in the economic evaluation are the level of care dependency, the degree of disability as measured by the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0), quality-adjusted life years (QALY) derived from the EQ-5D-5L and the German utility set, and complications occurring during the index hospital stay. Each adopted perspective considers different types of costs and outcomes as outlined in the protocol. All analyses will feature Intention-To-Treat analysis. To explore methodological and parametric uncertainties, we will conduct probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. Subgroup analyses will be performed as secondary analyses.

DISCUSSION

The health economic evaluation will provide insights into the cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation in older frail populations, informing decision-making processes and contributing to the evidence base in this field. Potential limitation includes a highly heterogeneous trial population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PRAEP-GO RCT: NCT04418271; economic evaluation: OSF ( https://osf.io/ecm74 ).

Qualitative assessment of expectations on the content, form and way of delivery of a prehabilitation programme in patients with lung resection surgery - A Swiss tertiary centre experience

Objective

To assess the interest in a prehabilitation programme of patients awaiting lung resection and to identify expectations from such a programme.

Introduction

At present, in Switzerland, there are no multimodal clinical prehabilitation programmes for lung resection patients awaiting surgery.

Methods

Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with patients who have had or were awaiting lung resection at a Swiss tertiary centre. Thematic analysis was performed to identify common prespecified themes.

Results

Twenty-two patients (45.5% female, age 70.6 ± 16.6 years) were interviewed. Seventy-seven percent were interested in a prehabilitation programme. Sixty-two percent, 67% and 90% were interested in endurance, strength and respiratory training, respectively. Six patients (27%) were active smokers, of whom two (one-third) were interested in a smoking cessation programme. Seventy-six percent were interested in nutrition counselling and 90% in receiving education on risk factor management. Forty percent preferred centre-based training/counselling sessions, 20% preferred home-based training/counselling and 30% found both forms acceptable. Patients were willing to perform prehabilitation activities on 2.6 days/week for a total of 162 min/week. Participating in peer groups was desired by only 25%.

Conclusions

Patients with lung resection were highly interested in participating in prehabilitation, albeit only for a mean time cost of 2.7 h per week. Offering a prehabilitation programme with a combination of in-hospital group sessions and home-based training seems feasible.

Physiotherapy provided for patients undergoing thoracic surgery in Sweden - a national survey of practice

INTRODUCTION

Patients undergoing thoracic surgery commonly receive perioperative physio-therapy, typically consisting of education, mobilization, breathing exercises, and mobility exercises. To date, no study has described physiotherapy practice for patients undergoing thoracic surgery in Sweden.

PURPOSE

To investigate physiotherapy interventions for patients undergoing thoracic surgery in Sweden.

METHODS

All physiotherapists currently working in thoracic surgery units in Sweden (n = 8) were eligible to participate. A survey was e-mailed to the physiotherapists, to determine physiotherapy interventions offered to patients undergoing thoracoscopy or open thoracic surgery. Of 21 physiotherapists, 13 (62%) responded, representing seven hospitals.

RESULTS

Physiotherapists reported routinely providing preoperative education and postoperative treatment for all patients undergoing thoracic surgery. Breathing exercises and mobilization were usually initiated on the day of surgery or the first postoperative day. Common treatments were deep breathing exercises, with or without positive expiratory pressure, and airway clearance techniques. Upper limb and shoulder exercises were typically initiated on the first or second day after surgery. The most important factor reported to influence treatment choice was personal experience of the attending physiotherapist. No routine post-discharge rehabilitation was provided.

CONCLUSION

Physiotherapists in Sweden reported routinely treating patients scheduled for thoracic surgery, both pre and postoperatively. Prehabilitation or post-discharge rehabilitation was not routinely provided.