Background: Multimodal prehabilitation programs are effective at reducing complications after colorectal surgery in patients with a high risk of postoperative complications due to low aerobic capacity and/or malnutrition. However, high implementation fidelity is needed to achieve these effects in real-life practice. This study aimed to investigate the implementation fidelity of an evidence-based prehabilitation program in the real-life context of a Dutch regional hospital.Methods: In this observational cohort study with multiple case analyses, all patients who underwent colorectal surgery from January 2023 to June 2023 were enrolled. Patients meeting the criteria for low aerobic capacity or malnutrition were advised to participate in a prehabilitation program. According to recent scientific insights and the local care context, this program consisted of four exercise modalities and three nutrition modalities. Implementation fidelity was investigated by evaluating: (1) coverage (participation rate), (2) duration (number of days between the start of prehabilitation and surgery), (3) content (delivery of prescribed intervention modalities), and (4) frequency (attendance of sessions and compliance with prescribed parameters). An aggregated percentage of content and frequency was calculated to determine overall adherence.Results: Fifty-eight patients intended to follow the prehabilitation care pathway, of which 41 performed a preoperative risk assessment (coverage 80%). Ten patients (24%) were identified as high-risk and participated in the prehabilitation program (duration of 33-84 days). Adherence was high (84-100%) in five and moderate (72-73%) in two patients. Adherence was remarkably low (25%, 53%, 54%) in three patients who struggled to execute the prehabilitation program due to multiple physical and cognitive impairments.Conclusion: Implementation fidelity of an evidence-based multimodal prehabilitation program for high-risk patients preparing for colorectal surgery in real-life practice was moderate because adherence was high for most patients, but low for some patients. Patients with low adherence had multiple impairments, with consequences for their preparation for surgery. For healthcare professionals, it is recommended to pay attention to high-risk patients with multiple impairments and further personalize the prehabilitation program. More knowledge about identifying and treating high-risk patients is needed to provide evidence-based recommendations and to obtain higher effectiveness.
LINK
Background: Medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are highly prevalent and pose a burden both on patients and on health care. In a pilot study psychosomatic therapy delivered by specialised therapists for patients with MUS showed promising results with regard to patient’s acceptability, feasibility and effects on symptoms. The aim of this study is to establish whether psychosomatic therapy by specialised psychosomatic exercise therapists is costeffective in decreasing symptoms and improving functioning in patients who frequently consult their general practitioner (GP) with MUS. Methods: A randomised effectiveness trial with an economic evaluation in primary care with 158 patients aged 18 years and older who are frequently consulting their GP with MUS. Patients will be assigned to psychosomatic therapy in addition to usual care or usual care only. Psychosomatic therapy is a multi-component and tailored intervention, aiming to empower patients by applying psycho-education, relaxation techniques, mindfulness, cognitive approaches and/or graded activity. Patients assigned to the psychosomatic therapy receive 6 to 12 sessions of psychosomatic therapy, of 30–45 min each, delivered by a specialised exercise or physical therapist. Primary outcome measure is patient-specific functioning and disability, measured with the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS). Secondary outcome measures are symptom severity, consultation frequency and referrals to secondary care, patient satisfaction, quality of life and costs. Assessments will be carried out at baseline, and after 4 and 12 months. An economic evaluation alongside the trial will be conducted from a societal perspective, with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as outcome measure. Furthermore, a mixed-methods process evaluation will be conducted. Discussion: We expect that psychosomatic therapy in primary care for patients who frequently attend the GP for MUS will improve symptoms and daily functioning and disability, while reducing consultation frequency and referrals to secondary care. We expect that the psychosomatic therapy provides value for money for patients with MUS.Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register, ID: NL7157 (NTR7356). Registered 13 July 2018.Keywords: Psychosomatic therapy, Study protocol, Primary care, Randomised controlled trial, Medically unexplained symptoms, Cost-effectiveness
MULTIFILE
Introduction: Hip and knee osteoarthritis are associated with functional limitations, pain and restrictions in quality of life and the ability to work. Furthermore, with growing prevalence, osteoarthritis is increasingly causing (in)direct costs. Guidelines recommend exercise therapy and education as primary treatment strategies. Available options for treatment based on physical activity promotion and lifestyle change are often insufficiently provided and used. In addition, the quality of current exercise programmes often does not meet the changing care needs of older people with comorbidities and exercise adherence is a challenge beyond personal physiotherapy. The main objective of this study is to investigate the short- and long-term (cost-)effectiveness of the SmArt-E programme in people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis in terms of pain and physical functioning compared to usual care. Methods: This study is designed as a multicentre randomized controlled trial with a target sample size of 330 patients. The intervention is based on the e-Exercise intervention from the Netherlands, consists of a training and education programme and is conducted as a blended care intervention over 12 months. We use an app to support independent training and the development of self-management skills. The primary and secondary hypotheses are that participants in the SmArt-E intervention will have less pain (numerical rating scale) and better physical functioning (Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) compared to participants in the usual care group after 12 and 3 months. Other secondary outcomes are based on domains of the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI). The study will be accompanied by a process evaluation. Discussion: After a positive evaluation, SmArt-E can be offered in usual care, flexibly addressing different care situations. The desired sustainability and the support of the participants' behavioural change are initiated via the app through audio-visual contact with their physiotherapists. Furthermore, the app supports the repetition and consolidation of learned training and educational content. For people with osteoarthritis, the new form of care with proven effectiveness can lead to a reduction in underuse and misuse of care as well as contribute to a reduction in (in)direct costs.
LINK
