Observational studyJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2026
The Effect of Prehabilitation on Health Resource Use and 1-Year Survival: An Observational Cohort Evaluation of the Active Together Service.
Observational study in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionResearch suggests that multi-modal prehabilitation can improve quality of life and clinical outcomes. There is, however, limited evidence on the effect of prehabilitation on hospital resource use.
methodsThis is a non-randomised observational cohort evaluation. The intervention group were patients receiving multi-modal prehabilitation (Active Together) before surgery for colorectal, lung or upper gastrointestinal cancer between January 2022 and March 2024. Patients who declined to participate in Active Together and historical patient data (2017-2021) were used as comparator groups. Outcome measures were length of hospital stay, length of critical care stay, total number of days spent in hospital as a readmission within 90 days following surgery, and one-year survival rate.
resultsThree hundred and five patients completed prehabilitation, 96 patients declined to join the service, and 869 patients were included in the historical dataset. Active Together colorectal patients spent less time in critical care than historical colorectal patients (0.9 vs 1.2 days, p = 0.011). Whereas Active Together lung patients spent longer in critical care than historical lung patients (2.5 vs 1.7 days, p < 0.001). One-year survival rate was greater in Active Together patients compared to the declined group (95% vs 85%, p = 0.013) but did not differ significantly from the historical group (95% vs 92%, p = 0.140). The probability of prehabilitation being more cost-effective than not receiving prehabilitation was 58%, 60%, and 59% for colorectal, lung and upper gastrointestinal patients, respectively.
conclusionThe impact of prehabilitation on healthcare resource use was mixed with promising evidence of a positive effect of prehabilitation and rehabilitation on overall survival. There were notable differences between tumour groups in these outcomes which warrants further investigation. Future research is needed to build on these findings by including a larger sample size, a wider range of tumour groups, and a longer follow up period.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.