Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39375223›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024

Nutritional intervention during a teleprehabilitation pilot study in high-risk patients with colorectal cancer: adherence, motivators, and barriers.

K Beukers, R F W Franssen, K Beijaard, A J van de Wouw, R C Havermans, M L G Janssen-Heijnen

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Prehabilitation for cancer surgery: a systematic review of qualitative literature from experienced stakeholders.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
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

6 authors.

K BeukersDepartment of Internal Medicine, VieCuri Medical Centre, Tegelseweg 210, 5912 BL, Venlo, The Netherlands. kris.beukers@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
R F W FranssenDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, The Netherlands.
K BeijaardDepartment of Dietetics, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, The Netherlands.
A J van de WouwDepartment of Internal Medicine, VieCuri Medical Centre, Tegelseweg 210, 5912 BL, Venlo, The Netherlands.
R C HavermansDepartment of Youth, Food, and Health, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
M L G Janssen-HeijnenDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe preoperative period provides a window of opportunity to improve modifiable risk factors for treatment complications such as malnutrition, the so-called prehabilitation. Identifying factors related to adherence to nutritional interventions is essential for optimizing prehabilitation programs. The aim of this study is to evaluate a nutritional support module as part of a teleprehabilitation program in high-risk patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

methodsA secondary analysis with a mixed method design of the nutritional support module of a pre-post teleprehabilitation pilot study was performed. Change in weight, complaints with intake, motivation, and subjective and objective adherence were evaluated.

resultsEleven patients were included. Subjectively, six patients (55%) were able to adhere to the nutritional advice. Despite that, nine of eleven (82%) patients experienced difficulties with the amount of food that was advised by the dietician. Six of eleven (55%) patients gained weight during the prehabilitation program. After prehabilitation, nine of eleven (82%) were able to reach 100% of their energy requirement and six of eleven (55%) were able to reach 100% of their protein requirement. Differences between patients in motivation and/or having complaints did not seem to be associated with protein and energy intake.

conclusionThis secondary analysis of a pilot study provides insights into understanding patients' experiences with a nutritional support module as part of a teleprehabilitation program. With 82% of patients who were able to reach 100% of their energy requirement, teleprehabilitation seems to be feasible, while there is still room for improvement with respect to protein intake as only 55% of patients reached a sufficient intake.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsMotivationPatient ComplianceAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMalnutritionMiddle AgedNutritional SupportPilot ProjectsPreoperative CareRisk FactorsTelemedicineAdherenceColorectal cancerNutritionPrehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID39375223
PMCPMC11458744

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.