Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35996196›Full record

ArticlePerioperative medicine (London, England)2022

Prehabilitation in high-risk patients scheduled for major abdominal cancer surgery: a feasibility study.

Jamie L Waterland, Hilmy Ismail, Catherine L Granger, Cameron Patrick, Linda Denehy, Bernhard Riedel, Centre for Prehabilitation and Perioperative Care

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Perioperative medicine (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jamie L WaterlandPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Department of Anaesthesia, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Melbourne, Australia. jwaterland@student.unimelb.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7960-885X
Hilmy IsmailPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Department of Anaesthesia, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7985-787X
Catherine L GrangerDepartment of Physiotherapy, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6169-370X
Cameron PatrickThe University of Melbourne, Statistical Consulting Centre, School of Mathematics and Statistics, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4677-535X
Linda DenehyDepartment of Physiotherapy, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2926-8436
Bernhard RiedelPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Department of Anaesthesia, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2577-3918
Centre for Prehabilitation and Perioperative Care
The University of Melbourne · AUThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AUPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients presenting for major surgery with low cardiorespiratory fitness (deconditioning) and other modifiable risk factors are at increased risk of postoperative complications. This study investigated the feasibility of delivering prehabilitation in high-risk patients scheduled for major abdominal cancer surgery.

methodsEligible patients in this single-center cohort study included patients with poor fitness (objectively assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing, CPET) scheduled for elective major abdominal cancer surgery. Patients were recruited to participate in a prehabilitation program that spanned up to 6 weeks pre-operatively and comprised aerobic and resistance exercise training, breathing exercise, and nutritional support. The primary outcome assessed pre-specified feasibility targets: recruitment >70%, retention >85%, and intervention adherence >70%. Secondary outcomes were assessed for improved pre-operative functional status and health-related quality of life and for postoperative complications.

resultsEighty-two (34%) out of 238 patients screened between April 2018 and December 2019 were eligible for recruitment. Fifty (61%) patients (52% males) with a median age of 71 (IQR, 63-77) years participated in the study. Baseline oxygen consumption the at anaerobic threshold and at peak exercise (mean±SD: 9.8±1.8 and 14.0±2.9 mL/kg/min, respectively) confirmed the deconditioned state of the study cohort. The retention rate within the prehabilitation program was 84%, with 42 participants returning for repeat CPET testing. While >60% of participants preferred to do home-based prehabilitation, adherence to the intervention was low-with only 12 (28%) and 15 (35%) of patients having self-reported compliance >70% with their exercise prescriptions.

conclusionOur prehabilitation program in high-risk cancer surgery patients did not achieve pre-specified targets for recruitment, retention, and self-reported program adherence. These findings underpin the importance of implementation research and strategies for the prehabilitation programs in major surgery.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12620000073909 ) retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

Cardiopulmonary exercise testingCPETHigh-risk patientsMajor surgeryPrehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID35996196
PMCPMC9396890
OpenAlexW4292673967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.