Prehabilitation, making patients fit for surgery - a new frontier in perioperative care

Patients' and carers' views on research priorities in prehabilitation for cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

The views of patients and carers are important for the development of research priorities. This study aimed to determine and compare the top research priorities of cancer patients and carers with those of multidisciplinary clinicians with expertise in prehabilitation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study surveyed patients recovering from cancer surgery at a major tertiary hospital in Sydney, Australia, and/or their carers between March and July 2023. Consenting patients and carers were provided a list of research priorities according to clinicians with expertise in prehabilitation, as determined in a recent International Delphi study. Participants were asked to rate the importance of each research priority using a 5-item Likert scale (ranging from 1 = very high research priority to 5 = very low research priority).

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients and 50 carers participated in this study. Four areas were identified as research priorities, achieving consensus of highest importance (> 70% rated as "high" or "very high" priority) by patients, carers, and clinical experts. These were "optimal composition of prehabilitation programs" (77% vs. 82% vs. 88%), "effect of prehabilitation on surgical outcomes" (85% vs. 90% vs. 95%), "effect of prehabilitation on functional outcomes" (83% vs. 86% vs. 79%), and "effect of prehabilitation on patient reported outcomes" (78% vs. 84% vs. 79%). Priorities that did not reach consensus of high importance by patients despite reaching consensus of highest importance by experts included "identifying populations most likely to benefit from prehabilitation" (70% vs. 76% vs. 90%) and "defining prehabilitation core outcome measures" (66% vs. 74% vs. 87%). "Prehabilitation during neoadjuvant therapies" reached consensus of high importance by patients but not by experts or carers (81% vs. 68% vs. 69%).

CONCLUSION

This study delineated the primary prehabilitation research priorities as determined by patients and carers, against those previously identified by clinicians with expertise in prehabilitation. It is recommended that subsequent high-quality research and resource allocation be directed towards these highlighted areas of importance.

[ERAS Implementation in Thoracic Surgery]

This manuscript provides an overview of the principles and requirements for implementing the ERAS program in thoracic surgery.The ERAS program optimises perioperative management of elective lung resection procedures and is based on the ERAS Guidelines for Thoracic Surgery of the ERAS Society. The clinical measures are described as in the current literature, with a focus on postoperative outcome. There are currently 45 enhanced recovery items covering four perioperative phases: from the prehospital admission phase (patient education, screening and treatment of potential risk factors such as anaemia, malnutrition, cessation of nicotine or alcohol abuse, prehabilitation, carbohydrate loading) to the immediate preoperative phase (shortened fasting period, non-sedating premedication, prophylaxis of PONV and thromboembolic complications), the intraoperative measures (antibiotic prophylaxis, standardised anaesthesia, normothermia, targeted fluid therapy, minimally invasive surgery, avoidance of catheters and probes) through to the postoperative measures (early mobilisation, early nutrition, removal of a urinary catheter, hyperglycaemia control). Most of these measures are based on scientific studies, with a high level of evidence and aim to reduce general postoperative complications.The ERAS program is an optimised perioperative treatment approach aiming to improve the postoperative recovery in patients after elective lung resection by reducing the overall complication rates and overall morbidity.

Prehabilitative versus rehabilitative exercise in prostate cancer patients undergoing prostatectomy

PURPOSE

The study compared the efficacy of commencing supervised exercise in men with prostate cancer before and after prostatectomy on objective and patient-reported outcomes, hospital length of stay, and urinary incontinence.

METHODS

Forty-one men were randomised to a 6-week prehabilitation or rehabilitation exercise programme. Prehabilitation involved resistance and aerobic exercise thrice weekly pre-surgery, while rehabilitation comprised the same commencing 6-weeks post-surgery. Assessments included strength, function (chair rise, stair climb, 400-m, 6-m usual, fast, and backwards walk), body composition, fatigue and quality of life, undertaken at pre-surgery, early post-surgery and late post-surgery phase, with urinary incontinence (24-h pad test) assessed at 2, 6, and 12-weeks post-surgery. Intention-to-treat and sensitivity analyses were undertaken.

RESULTS

Of thirty-eight men (48-73 years), 29 completed all assessments with most undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (92.1%). In the pre-surgery phase, prehabilitation improved muscle strength (leg press: 17.2 kg; chest press: 2.9 kg; p ≤ 0.001), 400-m, chair rise, 6-m fast and backward walk tests (p ≤ 0.001-0.028). Strength and function declines in the early post-surgery phase were maintained late post-surgery. Rehabilitation showed declines of these outcomes after surgery with improvement late post-surgery (leg press: 14.6 kg, p < 0.001; chest press: 6.8 kg, p < 0.001; 400-m walk: -12.0 s, p = 0.005), resulting in no difference between groups at 12 weeks. There were no significant differences between groups for patient-reported outcomes, hospital length of stay or urinary incontinence.

CONCLUSION

Pre-surgical exercise enhanced strength and function, protecting against post-surgery declines. Although exercise post-surgery is beneficial for recouping strength and function, where possible men undergoing prostatectomy are encouraged to exercise pre-surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12617001115325 registered 31 July 2017.

Research Priorities in Prehabilitation for Patients Undergoing Cancer Surgery: An International Delphi Study

BACKGROUND

Recently, the number of prehabilitation trials has increased significantly. The identification of key research priorities is vital in guiding future research directions. Thus, the aim of this collaborative study was to define key research priorities in prehabilitation for patients undergoing cancer surgery.

METHODS

The Delphi methodology was implemented over three rounds of surveys distributed to prehabilitation experts from across multiple specialties, tumour streams and countries via a secure online platform. In the first round, participants were asked to provide baseline demographics and to identify five top prehabilitation research priorities. In successive rounds, participants were asked to rank research priorities on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was considered if > 70% of participants indicated agreement on each research priority.

RESULTS

A total of 165 prehabilitation experts participated, including medical doctors, physiotherapists, dieticians, nurses, and academics across four continents. The first round identified 446 research priorities, collated within 75 unique research questions. Over two successive rounds, a list of 10 research priorities reached international consensus of importance. These included the efficacy of prehabilitation on varied postoperative outcomes, benefit to specific patient groups, ideal programme composition, cost efficacy, enhancing compliance and adherence, effect during neoadjuvant therapies, and modes of delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

This collaborative international study identified the top 10 research priorities in prehabilitation for patients undergoing cancer surgery. The identified priorities inform research strategies, provide future directions for prehabilitation research, support resource allocation and enhance the prehabilitation evidence base in cancer patients undergoing surgery.

Recommendations on the use of prehabilitation, i.e. comprehensive preparation of the patient for surgery

Prehabilitation is a comprehensive preparation of a patient for primarily surgical treatments. Its aim is to improve the patient'sgeneral condition so as to reduce the risk of complications and ensure the fastest possible recovery to full health. Thebasic components of prehabilitation include: improvement of nutritional status, appropriate exercises to improve functioning,psychological support, and help in eliminating addictions. Other important aspects of prehabilitation are: increasinghemoglobin levels in patients with anemia, achieving good glycemic control in patients with diabetes, treatment or stabilizationof any concurrent disorders, or specialist treatment associated with a specific procedure (endoprostheses, ostomyprocedure). This article organizes and outlines the indications for prehabilitation, its scope, duration, and the method to conductit. Experts of various specialties related to prehabilitation agree that it should be an element of surgery preparationwhenever possible, especially in patients with co-existing medical conditions who have been qualified for major procedures.Prehabilitation should be carried out by interdisciplinary teams, including family physicians and various specialists in thetreatment of comorbidities. Prehabilitation requires urgent systemic and reimbursement solutions.

Comparison of mortality rate and septic and aseptic revisions in total hip arthroplasties for osteoarthritis and femoral neck fracture: an analysis of the German Arthroplasty Registry

BACKGROUND

Indications for total hip arthroplasties (THA) differ from primary osteoarthritis (OA), which allows elective surgery through femoral neck fractures (FNF), which require timely surgical care. The aim of this investigation was to compare mortality and revisions in THA for primary OA and FNF.

METHODS

Data collection for this study was performed using the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD) with analysis THA for the treatment of FNF and OA. Cases were matched 1:1 according to age, sex, body mass index (BMI), cementation, and the Elixhauser score using Mahalanobis distance matching.

RESULTS

Overall 43,436 cases of THA for the treatment of OA and FNF were analyzed in this study. Mortality was significantly increased in FNF, with 12.6% after 1 year and 36.5% after 5 years compared with 3.0% and 18.7% in OA, respectively (p < 0.0001). The proportion for septic and aseptic revisions was significantly increased in FNF (p < 0.0001). Main causes for an aseptic failure were mechanical complications (OA: 1.1%; FNF: 2.4%; p < 0.0001) and periprosthetic fractures (OA: 0.2%; FNF: 0.4%; p = 0.021). As influencing factors for male patients with septic failure (p < 0.002), increased BMI and Elixhauser comorbidity score and diagnosis of fracture (all p < 0.0001) were identified. For aseptic revision surgeries, BMI, Elixhauser score, and FNF were influencing factors (p < 0.0001), while all cemented and hybrid cemented THA were associated with a risk reduction for aseptic failure within 90 days after surgery (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

In femoral neck fractures treated with THA, a significant higher mortality, as well as septic and aseptic failure rate, was demonstrated compared with prosthesis for the therapy of osteoarthritis. Increased Elixhauser comorbidity score and BMI are the main influencing factors for development of septic or aseptic failure and can represent a potential approach for prevention measures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Prognostic.

The influence of a multidisciplinary team meeting and prehabilitation on complex abdominal wall hernia repair outcomes

PURPOSE

Surgical site occurrences after transversus abdominis release in ventral hernia repair are still reported up to 15%. Evidence is rising that preoperative improvement of risk factors might contribute to optimal patient recovery. A reduction of complication rates up to 40% has been reported. The aim of this study was to determine whether prehabilitation has a favorable effect on the risk on wound and medical complications as well as on length of stay.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed in a tertiary referral center for abdominal wall surgery. All patients undergoing ventral hernia repair discussed at multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings between 2015 and 2019 were included. Patients referred for a preconditioning program by the MDT were compared to patients who were deemed fit for operative repair by the MDT, without such a program. Endpoints were patients, hernia, and procedure characteristics as well as length of hospital stay, wound and general complications.

RESULTS

A total of 259 patients were included of which 126 received a preconditioning program. Baseline characteristics between the two groups were statistically significantly different as the prehabilitated group had higher median BMI (28 vs 30, p < 0.001), higher HbA1c (41 vs 48, p = 0.014), more smokers (4% vs 25%, p < 0.001) and higher HPW classes due to more patient factors (14% vs 48%, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in intra-operative and postoperative outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed prehabilitation facilitates patients with relevant comorbidities achieving the same results as patients without those risk factors. The indication of a preconditioning program might be effective at the discretion of an MDT meeting. Further research could focus on the extent of such program to assess its value.

Multicomponent Prehabilitation as a Novel Strategy for Preventing Delirium in Older Chronic Limb Threatening Ischemia Patients: A Study Protocol

Objective

Chronic limb threatening ischemia is the final stage of peripheral arterial disease. Current treatment is based on revascularization to preserve the leg. In the older, hospitalized chronic limb threatening ischemia patient, delirium is a frequent and severe complication after revascularization. Delirium leads to an increased length of hospital stay, a higher mortality rate and a decrease in quality of life. Currently, no specific guidelines to prevent delirium in chronic limb threatening ischemia patients exist. We aim to evaluate the effect of a multicomponent, multidisciplinary prehabilitation program on the incidence of delirium in chronic limb threatening ischemia patients ≥65 years.

Design

A prospective observational cohort study to investigate the effects of the program on the incidence of delirium will be performed in a large teaching hospital in the Netherlands. This manuscript describes the design of the study and the content of this specific prehabilitation program.

Methods

Chronic limb threatening ischemia patients ≥65 years that require revascularization will participate in the program. This program focuses on optimizing the patient's overall health and includes delirium risk assessment, nutritional optimization, home-based physical therapy, iron infusion in case of anaemia and a comprehensive geriatric assessment in case of frailty. The primary outcome is the incidence of delirium. Secondary outcomes include quality of life, amputation-free survival, length of hospital stay and mortality. Exclusion criteria are the requirement of acute treatment or patients who are mentally incompetent to understand the procedures of the study or to complete questionnaires. A historical cohort from the same hospital is used as a control group.

Discussion

This study will clarify the effect of a prehabilitation program on delirium incidence in chronic limb threatening ischemia patients. New insights will be obtained on optimizing a patient's preoperative mental and physical condition to prevent postoperative complications, including delirium.

Trial

This protocol is registered at the Netherlands National Trial Register (NTR) number: NL9380.

Exercise and colorectal cancer survival: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The benefit of exercise to colorectal cancer patients has been advocated. However, comparative data to quantify the survival benefit is lacking. The aim of this review was to assess the effect of exercise on colorectal cancer survival.

METHODS

An up-to-date systematic review was performed on the available literature between 2000 and 2021 on PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases. All studies reporting on the impact of exercise and colorectal cancer outcomes in patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer were analysed. The main outcome measures were the overall survival (OS), cancer specific survival (CSS) and disease free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

A total of 13 prospective observational studies were included, accounting for 19,135 patients. Compared to negligible physical activity, overall survival (OS) was significantly increased for both moderate and highest activity group (HR 0.82, 95% CI: 0.74-0.90, p < 0.001 and HR 0.64, 0.56-0.72, p < 0.001 respectively). This was also reflected in cancer specific survival (CSS) analysis, but not disease-free survival (DFS) analysis.

CONCLUSION

Exercise was associated with an increased in overall survival after a colorectal cancer resection. This would support the promotion of exercise interventions amongst colorectal cancer patients.

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.

Prostate Cancer Prehabilitation and the Importance of Multimodal Interventions for Person-centred Care and Recovery

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer globally. Cancer prehabilitation is defined as a process on the continuum of care that occurs between the time of a cancer diagnosis and the beginning of acute treatment. This article will discuss the importance of prostate cancer prehabilitation interventions in optimising physical and psychological recovery to enhance person-centred care.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases including CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Scopus, professional websites, and grey literature were searched using Google Scholar.

CONCLUSION

Prehabilitation in cancer care aims to enhance perioperative care and recovery. An emerging field of research suggests that the preoperative period may be physically and psychologically salient to introduce modifiable self-management behaviours to optimise overall recovery.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Prostate cancer specialist nurses provide the hub of person-centred care across the entire cancer care continuum embedded within the multidisciplinary team. Individually tailored interventions such as exercise and pelvic floor muscle training programmes, nutritional advice, anxiety and depression reduction, and sexual well-being interventions should be considered in the prehabilitation phase of the cancer care continuum.