Cargando…

Prehabilitation exercise therapy for cancer: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of prehabilitation exercise intervention with respect to (1) acceptability, feasibility, and safety; and (2) physical function, measured by 6‐minute‐walk test (6MWT). DATA SOURCES: PRISMA guidelines were used to systematically search P...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Michael, Christina M., Lehrer, Eric J., Schmitz, Kathryn H., Zaorsky, Nicholas G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8267161/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34110101
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.4021
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of prehabilitation exercise intervention with respect to (1) acceptability, feasibility, and safety; and (2) physical function, measured by 6‐minute‐walk test (6MWT). DATA SOURCES: PRISMA guidelines were used to systematically search PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL databases evaluating prehabilitation exercise interventions. STUDY SELECTION: The inclusion criteria were studies investigating patients who underwent surgery for their cancer and underwent prehabilitation exercise. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Guidelines were applied by independent extraction by multiple observers. Data were pooled using a random‐effects model. MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S): Acceptability, feasibility, and safety rates were calculated. 6MWT (maximum distance a person can walk at their own pace on a hard, flat surface, measured in meters, with longer distance indicative of better performance status) was compared using two arms using the DerSimonian and Laird method. RESULTS: Objective 1. Across 21 studies included in this review, 1564 patients were enrolled, 1371 (87.7%) accepted the trial; of 1371, 1230 (89.7% feasibility) completed the intervention. There was no grade 3+ toxicities. Objective 2. Meta‐analysis of five studies demonstrated a statistically significant decrease in 6MWT distance postoperatively in the control group (mean difference = +27.9 m; 95% confidence interval (CI): 9.3; 46.6) and a significant improvement postoperatively in the prehabilitation group (mean difference = −24.1 m; 95% CI: −45.7; −2.6). Meta‐analysis demonstrated improvements in 6MWT distance 4–8 weeks postoperatively in the prehabilitation group compared to the control group (mean difference = −58.0 m, 95% CI: −92.8; −23.3). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Prehabilitation exercise for cancer patients undergoing surgery was found to be safe, acceptable, and feasible with a statistically significant improvement in the 6MWT, indicating that prehabilitation can improve postoperative functional capacity.