No abstract

Findings support the contribution of obesity to selective aspects of mid-life cognition after controlling for obesity-related comorbidities, while addressing limitations of previous research including employment of an adequate sample, a healthy-weight control group and stringent exclusion criteria. Further investigation into the functional impact of such deficits, the mechanisms underlying these poorer cognitive outcomes and the impact of weight-loss on cognition is required.

Purpose Evaluate the impact of a new multidisciplinary allied health prehabilitation service in haematologic cancer patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplant (AuSCT). Methods In a tertiary cancer centre, 12 months of prospectively collected data was retrospectively analysed. Patients were referred to an allied health service for individualised exercise prescription, nutrition intervention and, if indicated through screening, psychological intervention. Impact and operational success were investigated using the RE-AIM framework: patient uptake of the service and sample representativeness (reach); effectiveness in terms of changes in outcomes from initial to pre-transplant assessment; adoption of the service by key stakeholders; fidelity of the prescribed exercise program (implementation); and the extent to which the new service had become routine practice (maintenance). Results One hundred and eighty-three patients were referred to the AuSCT service over 12 months, of whom 133 (73%) were referred into the prehabilitation service, 128 (96%) were eligible and 116 (91%) participated. Patients were representative of Australian AuSCT patients. Eighty-nine patients reached pre-transplant assessment by data censoring; 6-min walk distance ( n = 45/89, 51%) improved a mean (95% CI) of 39.9 m (18.8 to 61.0, p =  < 0.005) from baseline. Fidelity of exercise prescription was moderate with 72% of eligible patients receiving the intended exercise interventions. The referral trend over time (maintenance) was high after the initiation period. Conclusion The prehabilitation service was well adopted by clinicians. Clinically relevant improvements in outcomes were demonstrated. Recommendations, including development of well-integrated discipline-specific assessment intervention and measurement protocols, are highlighted for service improvement. Prehabilitation should be routinely considered to support patients undergoing AuSCT. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-021-06607-w.

Background Patients presenting for major surgery with low cardiorespiratory fitness (deconditioning) and other modifiable risk factors are at increased risk of postoperative complications. This study investigated the feasibility of delivering prehabilitation in high-risk patients scheduled for major abdominal cancer surgery. Methods Eligible patients in this single-center cohort study included patients with poor fitness (objectively assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing, CPET) scheduled for elective major abdominal cancer surgery. Patients were recruited to participate in a prehabilitation program that spanned up to 6 weeks pre-operatively and comprised aerobic and resistance exercise training, breathing exercise, and nutritional support. The primary outcome assessed pre-specified feasibility targets: recruitment >70%, retention >85%, and intervention adherence >70%. Secondary outcomes were assessed for improved pre-operative functional status and health-related quality of life and for postoperative complications. Results Eighty-two (34%) out of 238 patients screened between April 2018 and December 2019 were eligible for recruitment. Fifty (61%) patients (52% males) with a median age of 71 (IQR, 63–77) years participated in the study. Baseline oxygen consumption the at anaerobic threshold and at peak exercise (mean±SD: 9.8±1.8 and 14.0±2.9 mL/kg/min, respectively) confirmed the deconditioned state of the study cohort. The retention rate within the prehabilitation program was 84%, with 42 participants returning for repeat CPET testing. While >60% of participants preferred to do home-based prehabilitation, adherence to the intervention was low—with only 12 (28%) and 15 (35%) of patients having self-reported compliance >70% with their exercise prescriptions. Conclusion Our prehabilitation program in high-risk cancer surgery patients did not achieve pre-specified targets for recruitment, retention, and self-reported program adherence. These findings underpin the importance of implementation research and strategies for the prehabilitation programs in major surgery. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12620000073909) retrospectively registered.

Purpose To evaluate the impact of routine multidisciplinary allied health prehabilitation care in haematologic cancer patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplant (AuSCT). Methods In a tertiary cancer centre, 12-months of prospectively collected data was retrospectively analysed. Patients were referred to the service for individualised exercise prescription, nutrition intervention and, if indicated through screening, psychological intervention. Impact and operational success were investigated based on the RE-AIM framework: patient uptake of the service and sample representativeness (Reach); Effectiveness in terms of changes in outcomes from initial to pre-transplant assessment; Adoption of the service by key stakeholders; fidelity of the prescribed exercise program (Implementation); and the extent to which the service had become part of routine standard care (Maintenance). Results 183 patients were referred to the AuSCT service, of whom 133 (73%) were referred into the prehabilitation service, 128 (96%) were eligible and 116 (91%) participated. Significant improvements were demonstrated between initial and pre-transplant assessments particularly six-minute walk distance (n = 45); mean difference (95% CI) 39.9m (18.8 to 61.0, p = < 0.005). Missing data were an issue for assessment of effectiveness. Fidelity of exercise prescription was moderate with 72% of eligible patients receiving the intended aerobic and resistance exercise interventions. Conclusion The prehabilitation service was well adopted by clinicians. Clinically relevant improvements in outcomes were demonstrated. Recommendations, including development of well-integrated discipline-specific assessment intervention and measurement protocols, are highlighted to improve the service. Prehabilitation should be routinely considered to support the care of patients undergoing AuSCT.