Purpose This article focuses on the following: The importance of prehabilitation in people with cancer and the known and hypothesised benefits. Exploration of the principles that can be used when developing services in the absence of a single accepted model of how these services could be established or configured. Description of approaches and learning in the development and implementation of prehabilitation across three different countries: Canada, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, based on the authors’ experiences and perspectives. Recent Findings Practical tips and suggestions are shared by the authors to assist others when implementing prehabilitation programmes. These include experience from three different approaches with similar lessons. Important elements include the following: (i) starting with a small identified clinical group of patients to refine and test the delivery model and demonstrate proof of concept; (ii) systematic data collection with clearly identified target outcomes from the outset; (iii) collaboration with a wide range of stakeholders including those who will be designing, developing, delivering, funding and using the prehabilitation services; (iv) adapting the model to fit local situations; (v) project leaders who can bring together and motivate a team; (vi) recognition and acknowledgement of the value that each member of a diverse multidisciplinary team brings; (vii) involvement of the whole team in prehabilitation prescription including identification of patients’ levels of risk through appropriate assessment and need-based interventions; (viii) persistence and determination in the development of the business case for sustainable funding; (ix) working with patients ambassadors to develop and advocate for the case for support; and (x) working closely with commissioners of healthcare. Summary Principles for the implementation of prehabilitation have been set out by sharing the experiences across three countries. These principles should be considered a framework for those wishing to design and develop prehabilitation services in their own areas to maximise success, effectiveness and sustainability.

IntroductionThe impact of the COVID-19 pandemic (caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus) on individuals with cancer has been profound. It has led to increased anxiety, distress and deconditioning due to reduced physical activity. We aim to investigate whether SafeFit, a multimodal intervention of physical activity, nutrition and psychological support delivered virtually by cancer exercise specialists (CES), can improve physical and emotional functionings during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods and analysisA phase III non-randomised intervention trial, target recruitment of 1050 adults with suspected or confirmed diagnosis of cancer. All recruited participants will receive the multimodal intervention delivered by CES for 6 months. Sessions will be delivered 1-to-1 using telephone/video conferencing consultations. CES will work with each participant to devise a personalised programme of (1) physical activity, (2) basic dietary advice and (3) psychological support, all underpinned by behaviour change support.Primary outcomePhysical and emotional functioning as measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30). Secondary outcomes: overall quality of life measured by EORTC-QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L, health economics, patient activation, self-efficacy to self-manage chronic disease, distress, impact of COVID-19 on emotional functioning, self-reported physical activity, functional capacity and nutrition. Adherence to the intervention will also be measured and a process evaluation conducted.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the Health Research Authority (reference number 20/NW/0254). Results of this trial will be disseminated through publication of peer-reviewed articles, presentations at scientific conferences, and to the public and people with cancer in collaboration with our patient and public involvement representatives and partners.Trial registration numberNCT04425616.

Background Recently, the number of prehabilitation trials has increased significantly. The identification of key research priorities is vital in guiding future research directions. Thus, the aim of this collaborative study was to define key research priorities in prehabilitation for patients undergoing cancer surgery. Methods The Delphi methodology was implemented over three rounds of surveys distributed to prehabilitation experts from across multiple specialties, tumour streams and countries via a secure online platform. In the first round, participants were asked to provide baseline demographics and to identify five top prehabilitation research priorities. In successive rounds, participants were asked to rank research priorities on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was considered if > 70% of participants indicated agreement on each research priority. Results A total of 165 prehabilitation experts participated, including medical doctors, physiotherapists, dieticians, nurses, and academics across four continents. The first round identified 446 research priorities, collated within 75 unique research questions. Over two successive rounds, a list of 10 research priorities reached international consensus of importance. These included the efficacy of prehabilitation on varied postoperative outcomes, benefit to specific patient groups, ideal programme composition, cost efficacy, enhancing compliance and adherence, effect during neoadjuvant therapies, and modes of delivery. Conclusions This collaborative international study identified the top 10 research priorities in prehabilitation for patients undergoing cancer surgery. The identified priorities inform research strategies, provide future directions for prehabilitation research, support resource allocation and enhance the prehabilitation evidence base in cancer patients undergoing surgery.

No abstract