Prehabilitation for general surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

被引:5
|
作者
Kovoor, Joshua G. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Nann, Silas D. [3 ,4 ]
Barot, Dwarkesh D. [3 ,4 ]
Garg, Devanshu [3 ,5 ]
Hains, Lewis [3 ,5 ]
Stretton, Brandon [2 ,5 ,6 ]
Ovenden, Christopher D. [5 ,6 ]
Bacchi, Stephen [2 ,5 ,6 ]
Chan, Erick [4 ]
Gupta, Aashray K. [1 ,4 ,5 ]
Hugh, Thomas J. [1 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] Queen Elizabeth Hosp, Adelaide, SA, Australia
[3] Hlth & Informat, Adelaide, SA, Australia
[4] Gold Coast Univ Hosp, Gold Coast, Qld, Australia
[5] Univ Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia
[6] Royal Adelaide Hosp, Adelaide, SA, Australia
[7] Royal North Shore Hosp, Sydney, NSW, Australia
关键词
general surgery; outcomes; prehabilitation; preoperative rehabilitation; recovery; CLINICAL-TRIAL; POSTOPERATIVE OUTCOMES; COLORECTAL-RESECTION; ABDOMINAL-SURGERY; CANCER; OPERATION; CAPACITY; MODEL;
D O I
10.1111/ans.18684
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Prehabilitation seeks to optimize patient health before surgery to improve out -comes. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted on prehabilitation, however an updated synthesis of this evidence is required across General Surgery to inform potential Supplementary discipline-level protocols. Accordingly, this systematic review of RCTs aimed to evaluate the use of prehabilitation interventions across the discipline of General Surgery.Methods: This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023403289), and adhered to PRISMA 2020 and SWiM guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE and Ovid Embase were searched to 4 March 2023 for RCTs evaluating prehabilitation interventions within the discipline of General Surgery. After data extraction, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Quantitative and qualitative data were synthesized and analysed. However, meta-analysis was precluded due to heterogeneity across included studies.Results: From 929 records, 36 RCTs of mostly low risk of bias were included. 17 (47.2%) were from Europe, and 14 (38.9%) North America. 30 (83.3%) investigated cancer populations. 31 (86.1%) investigated physical interventions, finding no significant differ-ence in 16 (51.6%) and significant improvement in 14 (45.2%). Nine (25%) investigated psychological interventions: six (66.7%) found significant improvement, three (33.3%) found no significant difference. Five (13.9%) investigated nutritional interventions, finding no significant difference in three (60%), and significant improvement in two (40%).Conclusions: Prehabilitation interventions showed mixed levels of effectiveness, and there is insufficient RCT evidence to suggest system-level delivery across General Surgery within standardized protocols. However, given potential benefits and non-inferiority to standard care, they should be considered on a case-by-case basis.
引用
收藏
页码:2411 / 2425
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Prehabilitation Programs For Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review Of Randomized-controlled Trials
    Meneses-Echavez, Jose F.
    Loaiza-Betancur, Andres F.
    Triana-Reina, Hector R.
    Diaz-Lopez, Victor A.
    Echavarria-Rodriguez, Andres M.
    [J]. MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2021, 53 (08): : 471 - 471
  • [2] Prehabilitation programs for cancer patients: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (protocol)
    Meneses-Echavez, Jose F.
    Loaiza-Betancur, Andres F.
    Diaz-Lopez, Victor
    Echavarria-Rodriguez, Andres M.
    [J]. SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2020, 9 (01)
  • [3] Prehabilitation programs for individuals with cancer: a systematic review of randomized-controlled trials
    Jose F. Meneses-Echavez
    Andrés F. Loaiza-Betancur
    Víctor Díaz-López
    Andrés M. Echavarría-Rodríguez
    Héctor Reynaldo Triana-Reina
    [J]. Systematic Reviews, 12
  • [4] Prehabilitation programs for individuals with cancer: a systematic review of randomized-controlled trials
    Meneses-Echavez, Jose F.
    Loaiza-Betancur, Andres F.
    Diaz-Lopez, Victor
    Echavarria-Rodriguez, Andres M.
    Triana-Reina, Hector Reynaldo
    [J]. SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2023, 12 (01)
  • [5] Prehabilitation programs for cancer patients: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (protocol)
    Jose F. Meneses-Echávez
    Andrés F. Loaiza-Betancur
    Víctor Díaz-López
    Andrés M. Echavarría-Rodríguez
    [J]. Systematic Reviews, 9
  • [6] Blinding in randomized controlled trials in general and abdominal surgery: a systematic review and empirical study
    Probst, Pascal
    Zaschke, Steffen
    Heger, Patrick
    Knebel, Phillip
    Ulrich, Alexis
    Buechler, Markus W.
    Diener, Markus K.
    [J]. TRIALS, 2017, 18
  • [7] A Systematic Review of Patient-reported Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials of Unplanned General Surgery
    Daniel J. Stevens
    Natalie S. Blencowe
    Philip J. McElnay
    Rhiannon C. Macefield
    Jelena Savović
    Kerry N. L. Avery
    Jane M. Blazeby
    [J]. World Journal of Surgery, 2016, 40 : 267 - 276
  • [8] Blinding in randomized controlled trials in general and abdominal surgery: Protocol for a systematic review and empirical study
    Probst P.
    Grummich K.
    Heger P.
    Zaschke S.
    Knebel P.
    Ulrich A.
    Büchler M.W.
    Diener M.K.
    [J]. Systematic Reviews, 5 (1)
  • [9] A Systematic Review of Patient-reported Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials of Unplanned General Surgery
    Stevens, Daniel J.
    Blencowe, Natalie S.
    McElnay, Philip J.
    Macefield, Rhiannon C.
    Savovic, Jelena
    Avery, Kerry N. L.
    Blazeby, Jane M.
    [J]. WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2016, 40 (02) : 267 - 276
  • [10] Reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in prehabilitation: a scoping review
    Engel, Dominique
    Testa, Giuseppe Dario
    Mcisaac, Daniel I.
    Carli, Francesco
    Santa Mina, Daniel
    Baldini, Gabriele
    Scheede-Bergdahl, Celena
    Chevalier, Stephanie
    Edgar, Linda
    Beilstein, Christian M.
    Huber, Markus
    Fiore, Julio F.
    Gillis, Chelsia
    [J]. PERIOPERATIVE MEDICINE, 2023, 12 (01)