Background Prehabilitation offers patients the opportunity to actively participate in their perioperative care by preparing themselves for their upcoming surgery. Experiencing barriers may lead to non-participation, which can result in a reduced functional capacity, delayed post-operative recovery and higher healthcare costs. Insight in the barriers and facilitators to participation in prehabilitation can inform further development and implementation of prehabilitation. The aim of this review was to identify patient-experienced barriers and facilitators for participation in prehabilitation. Methods For this mixed methods systematic review, articles were searched in PubMed, EMBASE and CINAHL. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they contained data on patient-reported barriers and facilitators to participation in prehabilitation in adults undergoing major surgery. Following database search, and title and abstract screening, full text articles were screened for eligibility and quality was assessed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. Relevant data from the included studies were extracted, coded and categorized into themes, using an inductive approach. Based on these themes, the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour (COM-B) model was chosen to classify the identified themes. Results Three quantitative, 14 qualitative and 6 mixed methods studies, published between 2007 and 2022, were included in this review. A multitude of factors were identified across the different COM-B components. Barriers included lack of knowledge of the benefits of prehabilitation and not prioritizing prehabilitation over other commitments (psychological capability), physical symptoms and comorbidities (physical capability), lack of time and limited financial capacity (physical opportunity), lack of social support (social opportunity), anxiety and stress (automatic motivation) and previous experiences and feeling too fit for prehabilitation (reflective motivation). Facilitators included knowledge of the benefits of prehabilitation (psychological capability), having access to resources (physical opportunity), social support and encouragement by a health care professional (social support), feeling a sense of control (automatic motivation) and beliefs in own abilities (reflective motivation). Conclusions A large number of barriers and facilitators, influencing participation in prehabilitation, were found across all six COM-B components. To reach all patients and to tailor prehabilitation to the patient’s needs and preferences, it is important to take into account patients’ capability, opportunity and motivation.
DOCUMENT
Prehabilitation trajectories contribute to improving lifestyle choices and influencing risk factors to reduce postoperative complications, the overall hospital stay and lower health care costs. This paper gives an overview of the best current evidence on the role, scope, added value and expertise of nurses during the prehabilitation trajectory of patients with GI cancer, consisting of relevant nursing diagnosis, interventions and outcomes within four specific domains. The methods used are literature searches that were performed between June 2022 and January 2023, with a final search on January 25th. The search strategy included four steps, following the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual. Two researchers contributed to the study selection process. The results were categorized according to the domains of multimodal prehabilitation. The Handbook of Carpenito was used to link the results to nursing diagnoses, interventions and nurse sensitive outcomes.
DOCUMENT
Introduction: This study evaluates the course of physical fitness and nutritional status during curative therapy for esophageal cancer, after implementation of a prehabilitation program. Additionally, the impact of baseline physical fitness level and severe postoperative complications on the course of individual patients were explored. Materials and methods: This multicenter, observational cohort study included patients with esophageal cancer following curative treatment. Prehabilitation, consisting of supervised exercise training and nutritional counseling was offered as standard care to patients after neoadjuvant therapy, prior to surgery. Primary outcome measures included change of exercise capacity, hand grip strength, self-reported physical functioning, Body Mass Index, and malnutrition risk from diagnosis to 2–6 months postoperatively. Analyses over time were performed using linear mixed models, and linear mixed regression models to investigate the impact of baseline level and severe postoperative complications. Results: Hundred sixty-eight patients were included (mean age 65.9 ± 8.6 years; 78.0 % male). All parameters (except for malnutrition risk) showed a decline during neoadjuvant therapy (p < .05), an improvement during prehabilitation (p < .005) and a decline postoperatively (p < .001), with a high heterogeneity between patients. Change in the outcomes from baseline to postoperatively was not different for patients with or without a severe complication. Better baseline physical fitness and nutritional status were significantly associated with a greater decline postoperatively (p < .001). Conclusion: This study demonstrates a notable decline during neoadjuvant therapy, that fully recovers during prehabilitation, and a subsequent long lasting decline postoperatively. The heterogeneity in the course of physical fitness and nutritional status underlines the importance of individualized monitoring.
DOCUMENT
