Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
Delivering prehabilitation in cancer surgery: a service evaluation at Nottingham University Hospitals.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alharbi Abdulrahman, Haywood Ayleen, O'Connor Dominic
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate outcomes of a multimodal prehabilitation service for cancer surgery patients delivered through three pathways (Specialised, Targeted, Universal) within routine NHS care at Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust.
METHODS: This was a retrospective observational service evaluation of routine care data collected between 2022 and 2025. Of 1961 referred patients, 1720 were analysed: Specialised (n = 329), Targeted (n = 943), and Universal (n = 448). Multimodal prehabilitation included exercise, nutrition, and psychological support, stratified by risk. Functional capacity was assessed using the Incremental Shuttle Walk Test (ISWT), 60-s Sit-to-Stand (STS), and grip strength. Psychological well-being was measured using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Physical activity behaviour was also recorded.
RESULTS: All pathways showed significant within-group improvements. ISWT increased by 57 m (p < 0.001, d = 0.6) and STS by 6 repetitions (p < 0.001, d = 0.9). Anxiety (Δ -1.9) and depression (Δ -2.0) scores decreased (both p < 0.001, d ≈ -0.5). Weekly physical activity rose by 142 min (d = 1.07), and strength sessions increased by 2.4 per week (d = 1.1). Between-group differences were limited: PHQ-9 improved more in Specialised versus Targeted, and strength sessions increased more in Universal versus Targeted.
CONCLUSION: A tiered, multimodal prehabilitation service integrated into cancer pathways produced meaningful functional, psychological, and behavioural benefits, supporting broader implementation and improved patient access.
METHODS: This was a retrospective observational service evaluation of routine care data collected between 2022 and 2025. Of 1961 referred patients, 1720 were analysed: Specialised (n = 329), Targeted (n = 943), and Universal (n = 448). Multimodal prehabilitation included exercise, nutrition, and psychological support, stratified by risk. Functional capacity was assessed using the Incremental Shuttle Walk Test (ISWT), 60-s Sit-to-Stand (STS), and grip strength. Psychological well-being was measured using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Physical activity behaviour was also recorded.
RESULTS: All pathways showed significant within-group improvements. ISWT increased by 57 m (p < 0.001, d = 0.6) and STS by 6 repetitions (p < 0.001, d = 0.9). Anxiety (Δ -1.9) and depression (Δ -2.0) scores decreased (both p < 0.001, d ≈ -0.5). Weekly physical activity rose by 142 min (d = 1.07), and strength sessions increased by 2.4 per week (d = 1.1). Between-group differences were limited: PHQ-9 improved more in Specialised versus Targeted, and strength sessions increased more in Universal versus Targeted.
CONCLUSION: A tiered, multimodal prehabilitation service integrated into cancer pathways produced meaningful functional, psychological, and behavioural benefits, supporting broader implementation and improved patient access.