Outcomes reported in randomised trials of surgical prehabilitation: a scoping review

FLEURENT-GRÉGOIRE, Chloé, BURGESS, Nicola, DENEHY, Linda, EDBROOKE, Lara, ENGEL, Dominique, DARIO TESTA, Giuseppe, FIORE, Julio F, MCISAAC, Daniel I, CHEVALIER, Stéphanie, MOORE, John, GROCOTT, Michael P, COPELAND, Robert, LEVETT, Denny, SCHEEDE-BERGDAHL, Celena and GILLIS, Chelsia (2024). Outcomes reported in randomised trials of surgical prehabilitation: a scoping review. British Journal of Anaesthesia.

Preview

PDF Copeland-OutcomesReportedInRandomised(VoR).pdf - Published Version Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneity of reported outcomes can impact the certainty of evidence for prehabilitation. The objective of this scoping review was to systematically map outcomes and assessment tools used in trials of surgical prehabilitation. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched in February 2023. Randomised controlled trials of unimodal or multimodal prehabilitation interventions (nutrition, exercise, psychological support) lasting at least 7 days in adults undergoing elective surgery were included. Reported outcomes were classified according to the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research framework. RESULTS: We included 76 trials, mostly focused on abdominal or orthopaedic surgeries. A total of 50 different outcomes were identified, measured using 184 outcome assessment tools. Observer-reported outcomes were collected in 86% of trials (n=65), with hospital length of stay being most common. Performance outcomes were reported in 80% of trials (n=61), most commonly as exercise capacity assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Clinician-reported outcomes were included in 78% (n=59) of trials and most frequently included postoperative complications with Clavien-Dindo classification. Patient-reported outcomes were reported in 76% (n=58) of trials, with health-related quality of life using the 36- or 12-Item Short Form Survey being most prevalent. Biomarker outcomes were reported in 16% of trials (n=12) most commonly using inflammatory markers assessed with C-reactive protein. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial heterogeneity in the reporting of outcomes and assessment tools across surgical prehabilitation trials. Identification of meaningful outcomes, and agreement on appropriate assessment tools, could inform the development of a prehabilitation core outcomes set to harmonise outcome reporting and facilitate meta-analyses.

Item Type:	Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:	enhanced recovery after surgery; perioperative outcomes; prehabilitation; rehabilitation; surgery; 1103 Clinical Sciences; Anesthesiology; 3202 Clinical sciences
Identification Number:	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2024.01.046
SWORD Depositor:	Symplectic Elements
Depositing User:	Symplectic Elements
Date Deposited:	11 Apr 2024 14:38
Last Modified:	11 Apr 2024 14:45
URI:	https://shura.shu.ac.uk/id/eprint/33567

Actions (login required)

View Item

Downloads

Publication Metrics