Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39920321›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025

Supervised prehabilitation in patients scheduled for spinal surgery - a scoping review.

Pascale Gränicher, Leah Reicherzer, Florian Wanivenhaus, Mazda Farshad, Jörg Spörri, Markus Wirz, Johannes Scherr

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. The Added Value and the Efficacy of Preoperative Physiotherapy on Degenerative Diseases of the Lumbar Spine: A Systematic Review.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Role of paraspinal muscle fatty infiltration in predicting adjacent segment disease after lumbar spinal fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Pascale GränicherDepartment of Epidemiology, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Peter Debyeplein 1, Maastricht, 6229 HA, The Netherlands. pascale.graenicher@balgrist.ch.ORCID 0000-0001-8956-4547
Leah ReicherzerInstitute of Physiotherapy, Research and Development, ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Katharina-Sulzer-Platz 9, Winterthur, CH-8401, Switzerland.
Florian WanivenhausDepartment of Orthopedics, Balgrist University Hospital, University Spine Center Zurich, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 340, Zurich, CH-8008, Switzerland.
Mazda FarshadDepartment of Orthopedics, Balgrist University Hospital, University Spine Center Zurich, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 340, Zurich, CH-8008, Switzerland.
Jörg SpörriUniversity Center for Prevention and Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopedics, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 319, Zurich, CH-8008, Switzerland.
Markus WirzInstitute of Physiotherapy, Research and Development, ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Katharina-Sulzer-Platz 9, Winterthur, CH-8401, Switzerland.
Johannes ScherrUniversity Center for Prevention and Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopedics, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 319, Zurich, CH-8008, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background contextPrehabilitation before spinal surgery may enhance patients' ability to withstand physical and mental stress during the perioperative period. It has the potential to reduce complications, accelerate recovery, and deliver sustainable, patient-relevant improvements. However, high-quality evidence remains limited, and it is unclear which prehabilitation concepts, training protocols, and outcomes are most effective for different patient groups. PURPOSE: To evaluate the current state of research on preoperative interventions before spinal surgery, including the representation of subgroups, types of surgical procedures, and prehabilitation concepts. Additionally, it examines the outcomes analyzed and the methodologies employed in existing studies. STUDY

designScoping review based on a systematic literature search.

methodsA comprehensive database search in MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Cochrane Library, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Web of Science and Scopus was conducted. Exercise- and/or education-based prehabilitation concepts were identified, and findings were clustered and summarized according to PRISMA reporting standards.

resultsThirty-six reports from 23 studies (50% RCTs), evaluating prehabilitation programs in terms of feasibility, experiences, and effects on physical performance, self-reported function, pain, psychological outcomes and health-economic factors were included. These studies encompassed 2,964 participants scheduled for spinal surgery and reported a wide range of preoperative interventions, settings, and adherence rates. Prehabilitation focused primarily on education (87%) and exercise (35%), either independently or in combination. Most authors have concluded that preoperative interventions benefit patients awaiting spinal surgery, particularly by improving self-reported function, disability, and pain in both the short and long term. However, the findings also highlight the variability in outcomes, strengths, limitations, and recommendations across studies. Notably, 76% of the authors advocated for preoperative preparation, emphasizing the importance of structured, personalized programs and the need for further large-scale clinical trials.

conclusionBased on the current evidence, preparation for spinal surgery is recommended, provided that it is individualized, multimodal, and interdisciplinary, and addresses patients' specific impairments, resources, and expectations. Future research should focus on identifying subgroups defined by biopsychosocial risk factors that may influence short- and long-term perioperative outcomes.

Indexed as

Preoperative CarePreoperative ExerciseSpinal DiseasesSpineHumansPatient educationPhysiotherapyPrehabilitationPreoperative exerciseSpinal diseasesSpinal surgery

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.