BACKGROUND: Inadequate study reporting precludes interpretation of findings, pooling of results in meta-analyses, and delays knowledge translation. While prehabilitation interventions aim to enhance candidacy for surgery, to our knowledge, a review of the quality of reporting in prehabilitation has yet to be conducted. Our objective was to determine the extent to which randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of prehabilitation are reported according to methodological and intervention reporting checklists.
METHODS: Eligibility criteria: RCTs of unimodal or multimodal prehabilitation interventions.
METHODS: search was conducted in March 2022 using MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane.
METHODS: identified studies were compared to CONSORT, CERT & Modified CERT, TIDieR, PRESENT, and CONSORT-SPI. An agreement ratio (AR) was defined to evaluate if applicable guideline items were correctly reported. Data were analyzed as frequency (n, %) and mean with standard deviation (SD).
RESULTS: We identified 935 unique articles and included 70 trials published from 1994 to 2022. Most prehabilitation programs comprised exercise-only interventions (n = 40, 57%) and were applied before oncologic surgery (n = 32, 46%). The overall mean AR was 57% (SD: 20.9%). The specific mean ARs were as follows: CONSORT: 71% (SD: 16.3%); TIDieR: 62% (SD:17.7%); CERT: 54% (SD: 16.6%); Modified-CERT: 40% (SD:17.8%); PRESENT: 78% (SD: 8.9); and CONSORT-SPI: 47% (SD: 22.1).
CONCLUSIONS: Altogether, existing prehabilitation trials report approximately half of the checklist items recommended by methodological and intervention reporting guidelines. Reporting practices may improve with the development of a reporting checklist specific to prehabilitation interventions.

The unique anatomy of the human hand makes it possible to carefully manipulate tools, powerfully grasp objects, and even throw items with precision. These apparent contradictory functions of the hand, high mobility for manual dexterity vs high stability during forceful grasping, imply that daily activities impose a high strain on a relatively instable joint. This makes the hand susceptible to joint disorders such as osteoarthritis. Both systemic (eg, genetics, hormones) and mechanical factors (eg, joint loading) are important in the development of osteoarthritis, but the precise pathomechanism remains largely unknown. This paper focuses on the biomechanical factors in the disease process and how hand therapists can use this knowledge to improve treatment and research.
Multiple factors are involved in the onset and development of osteoarthritis in the hand. Comprehension of the biomechanics helps clinicians establish best practices for orthotics intervention, exercise, and joint protection programs even in de absence of clear evidence-based guidelines. The effect and reach of hand therapy for OA patients can be expanded substantially when intervention parameters are optimized and barriers to early referrals, access reimbursement, and adherence are addressed. Close and early collaboration between hand therapists and primary care, women\'s health, rheumatology, and hand surgery providers upon diagnosis, and with hand surgeons pre and postoperatively, combined with advances in the supporting science and strategies to enhance adherence, appear to be a promising way forward.

Prehabilitation employs exercise, nutrition, and psychological interventions to optimize physiological status in preparation for surgery. First, we described the extent to which material deprivation index score (MDIS) influenced prehabilitation participation. Second, we evaluated the extent to which prehabilitation influenced recovery as compared to control.
Pooled patient records from prospective multimodal prehabilitation studies in oncologic surgery were retrospectively examined. Patient postal codes were linked to their MDIS, a validated area-level socioeconomic status (SES) metric, as quintiles 1-5 (1 = highest SES). Functional capacity was evaluated with the 6-min walking test (6MWT) at baseline, before, and 8 weeks post-surgery. Influence of prehabilitation on length of hospital stay (LOS) was explored using generalized linear models with a negative binomial distribution adjusted for age, sex, surgical population, and MDIS.
Recruitment records were available from 2014 onwards, yielding 1013 eligible patients for prehabilitation participation with MDIS data. Fewer patients with a low SES enrolled (Q1:62% vs. Q5:47%; P = 0.01) and remained in prehabilitation studies (Q1: 59% vs. Q5: 45%; P = 0.07). Prehabilitation study records were available from 2008 onward, yielding 886 enrolled patients with MDIS data (n = 510 prehabilitation, n = 376 control). Preoperative 6MWT similarly improved by > 20 m in response to prehabilitation across SES strata (P < 0.05). Postoperative 6MWT could not be evaluated due to substantial missing data. Prehabilitation had a significant protective influence on LOS, as compared to control, in unadjusted and adjusted models [adjusted IRR:0.77 (95% CI:0.68 to 0.87; P < 0.001].
Findings suggest that prehabilitation is effective across all SES; however, participation across SES quintiles was not equal. Barriers to participation must be identified and addressed. Once these barriers are addressed, prehabilitation may reduce surgical disparities among SES.

Mounting evidence suggests that recovery begins before the surgical incision. The presurgery phase of recovery, namely the preparation for optimal surgical recovery, can be reinforced with prehabilitation. Prehabilitation is the approach of enhancing the functional capacity of the individual to enable them to withstand a stressful event. With this narrative review, we apply the Wilson and Cleary conceptual model of patient outcomes to specify the complex and integrative relationship of health factors that limit functional capacity before surgery. To have the greatest impact on patient outcomes, prehabilitation programs require individualised and coordinated care from medical, nutritional, psychosocial and exercise services.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate, in lung cancer patients awaiting elective surgery, the feasibility of delivering a novel four-week multimodal prehabilitation intervention and its effects on preoperative functional capacity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), compared to standard hospital care.
METHODS: Adult patients awaiting elective thoracotomy for lung cancer stages I, II or IIIa, were approached to participate in an open-label, randomized controlled trial of two parallel arms: multimodal prehabilitation combining a mixed-nutrient supplement with structured supervised and home-based exercise training, and relaxation-strategies (Prehab) or standard hospital care (Control). Feasibility was assessed based on recruitment and adherence rates to the intervention and study outcome assessment. Functional capacity, measured by the 6-min walk test (6MWT), and HRQoL were measured at baseline and after four weeks (preoperative).
RESULTS: Within 5 months, 34 patients were enrolled and randomized (2:1) to Prehab (n = 24; median age = 67 years) or Control (n = 10; median age = 69 years); recruitment rate of 58.6%. The study was interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Adherence to the prescribed intensity of the supervised exercise program was 84.1% (SD 23.1). Self-reported adherence to the home-based exercise program was 88.2% (SD 21) and to the nutritional supplement, 93.2% (SD 14.2). Adherence to patients\' preoperative assessment was 82% and 88% in Prehab and Control, respectively. The mean adjusted difference in 4-week preoperative 6MWT between groups was 37.7 m (95% CI, -6.1 to 81.4), p = 0.089. There were no differences in HRQoL between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Within a preoperative timeframe, it was feasible to deliver this novel multimodal prehabilitation intervention in lung cancer patients awaiting surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgical treatment of vestibular schwannoma (VS) leads to acute ipsilateral vestibular loss if there is residual vestibular function before surgery. To overcome the sequelae of acute ipsilateral vestibular loss and to decrease postoperative recovery time, the concept of preemptive vestibular ablation with gentamicin and vestibular prehabilitation before surgery has been developed (\"vestibular prehab\").
OBJECTIVE: Studying postural stability during walking and handicap of dizziness over a 1-year follow-up period in VS patients undergoing vestibular prehab before surgical treatment of VS.
METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive patients with a diagnosis of a VS undergoing surgical therapy from June 2012 to March 2018 was performed. All patients were included with documentation of the length of hospital duration and the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) and the Functional Gait Assessment (FGA) assessed preoperatively as well as 6 weeks and 1 year postoperatively.
RESULTS: A total 68 VS patients were included, of which 29 patients received preoperative vestibular ablation by intratympanic injection of gentamicin. Mean VS diameter was 20.2 mm (SD 9.4 mm) and mean age at surgery was 49.6 years (SD 11.5 years). Vestibular prehab had no effect on DHI and FGA at any time point studied.
CONCLUSIONS: We found no effect of vestibular prehab on postural stability during walking and on the handicap of dizziness. These findings add to the body of knowledge consisting of conflicting results of vestibular prehab. Therefore, vestibular prehab should be applied only in selected cases in an experimental setting.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of preoperative nutrition and multimodal prehabilitation on clinical and functional outcomes in surgical lung cancer patients.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and CENTRAL, EMBASE, Scopus, and clinical trial registries ( clinicaltrials.gov , International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and Google Scholar) to identify studies involving a preoperative nutrition-based intervention or multimodal prehabilitation (nutrition with exercise) of at least 7 days, in lung cancer patients awaiting surgery. Studies must have reported results on at least one of the following outcomes: functional capacity, pulmonary function, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool for randomized trials and the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-controlled trials.
RESULTS: Five studies were included (1 nutrition-only and 4 multimodal prehabilitation studies). Due to substantial heterogeneity in the interventions across studies, a meta-analysis was not conducted. Findings suggest that multimodal prehabilitation, compared with standard hospital care, is associated with improvements in both functional walking capacity and pulmonary function during the preoperative period; however it does not appear to have an effect on postoperative outcomes. Rather, the finding of significantly lower rates of postoperative complications in the intervention group was unique to the nutrition-only study.
CONCLUSIONS: Multimodal prehabilitation programs that combine nutrition and exercise may have beneficial effects on various physical function outcomes in patients with lung cancer awaiting surgery. Optimizing preoperative nutrition may have postoperative benefits which remain to be confirmed.

UNASSIGNED: Anatomical lung resection offers the best prospect of long-term survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, some patients with significant dyspnoea, impaired performance status (PS), borderline or poor pulmonary function are considered inoperable and instead referred for radiotherapy, chemotherapy or palliative care. The aims of the study were to determine whether pre-operative pulmonary physiotherapy (Prehab), by improving clinical parameters, (i) makes patients suitable for surgery who were considered inoperable on subjective criteria of dyspnoea >3 and PS >2, and objective criteria of diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) <50%; and (ii) thereby allows them to safely receive curative surgery with reduced morbidity and mortality.
UNASSIGNED: From January 2017 to December 2018 a total of 306 patients were prospectively and sequentially assessed for Prehab and 216 patients with lung cancer studied. Their mean age (95% CI) was 71.7 ± 1.1 years, 50.5% (n = 109) were men and they received Prehab over 39.0 ± 7.0 days averaging 3.1 ± 0.6 sessions. Their dyspnoea scores, PS, level of activity, six minute walk test (6MWT) and frailty index prior to and following Prehab were determined. Following surgery the post-operative length of hospital stay (LOHS), complications and mortality at 30 days, 90 days and 1 year determined. Similar outcomes were determined for (i) high-risk patients with dyspnoea scores >3 and PS >2, and compared with low-risk patients having dyspnoea scores <2 and PS <2 (subjective criteria); and (ii) high-risk patients with DLCO <50% and compared with low-risk patients with DLCO >80% (objective criteria).
UNASSIGNED: In the total cohort following Prehab, there was significant improvement in the dyspnoea scores <2 / ≥2 (40%/60% prior to Prehab vs. 65%/35% following Prehab, p = 0.00002), PS <2 / ≥2 (45%/55% prior to vs. 62%/38% following Prehab, p = 0.003), frailty index ≤3 / >3 (49%/51% vs 70%/30%, p = 0.0006), and 6MWT (306.6 ± 6.8 m vs 354.8 ± 52.7 m, p = 0.04). Post-operative major complication rates were 8.7%; median LOHS was 7 (IQR 6) days; hospital mortality at 30 days 1.3%, 90 days 4.7% and 1 year 16%. Using subjective criteria of dyspnoea scores >3 and PS >2, 100% of high-risk patients were considered inoperable. Following optimization with Prehab 84.2% of the high-risk patients were ready to proceed with radical treatment and 52.6% with surgery, and subsequently 42.8% of patients underwent surgery. Likewise, 78.8% of patients with DLCO <50% were considered inoperable. Following Prehab 86.5% of high-risk patients were ready to proceed with radical treatment and 59.1% with surgery, and 54.6% of high-risk patients underwent surgery. In each category there were no significant differences in complications, LOHS or mortality rates between the high-risk and low-risk patients.
UNASSIGNED: Our prospective study showed that with Prehab there was clinical and statistically significant improvement in the dyspnoea scores, PS, level of activity and frailty, particularly in the high-risk group of patients. Importantly, Prehab made previously inoperable patients operable, allowing them to safely undergo curative lung resection. This strategy helps improve resection rates and may contribute to the long term survival of lung cancer patients.
UNASSIGNED: This is a Welsh Health Specialised Services Committee (WHSSC) commissioned service.

Rehabilitation prior to orthopedic surgery (prehab) has been studied with more frequency and studies have shown reduced costs and improved functional outcomes among patients who have undergone total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This literature review is to determine whether prehab improves functional outcomes and reduces costs following spinal surgery. PubMed, CINHAL via EBSCO and EMBASE via Ovid were searched with publication date restrictions from May 2006 to May 2016 for the terms \'physical therapy\', \'physiotherapy\', \'prehabilitation\' or \'prehab\', \'spine\' or \'spinal\', and \'preoperative\' or \'pre-op\'. The search yielded 737 eligible articles which were screened by two independent reviewers. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) with adults who participated in preoperative exercise interventions as part of a prehab or preoperative exercise program for spinal surgery versus standard care were included. Methodology and results of the studies were critically appraised in conformity with PRISMA guidelines. Three RCTs were included, all of which analyzed outcomes of prehab following lumbar spinal surgery. Two of the articles were of high quality and three were of low quality. None of the studies demonstrated a statistically significant difference in pain scores or disability questionnaires in the intervention groups postoperatively, however, no negative effects were reported either. With neuroscience education, patient\'s reported feeling prepared for surgery and expressed positive outlook regarding the intervention. Two of the studies found perioperative intervention reduced the total cost of healthcare spending associated with spinal surgery. Due to the heterogeneity of the outcome measures, a meta-analysis was not possible. There is lack of significant evidence looking at functional outcomes using physical therapy prior to spinal surgery. Prehab should continue to be researched prior to spinal surgery to determine effectiveness in patient outcomes.

Preservation of lean body mass is an important cancer care objective. The capacity for prehabilitation interventions to modulate the lean body mass (LBM) of colorectal cancer patients before and after surgery is unknown.
A pooled analysis of two randomized controlled trials of trimodal prehabilitation vs. trimodal rehabilitation at a single university-affiliated tertiary center employing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) care was conducted. The prehabilitation interventions included exercise, nutrition, and anxiety-reduction elements that began approximately four weeks before surgery and continued for eight weeks after surgery. The rehabilitation interventions were identical to the prehabilitation interventions but were initiated only after surgery. Body composition, measured using multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis, was recorded at baseline, pre-surgery, 4 and 8 weeks after surgery. The primary outcome was change in LBM before and after colorectal surgery for cancer. A mixed effects regression model was used to estimate changes in body mass and body composition over time controlling for age, sex, baseline body mass index (BMI), baseline six-minute walk test (6MWT), and postoperative compliance to the interventions. NCT02586701 &NCT01356264.
Pooled data included 76 patients who followed prehabilitation and 63 patients who followed rehabilitation (n = 139). Neither group experienced changes in preoperative LBM. Compared to rehabilitated patients, prehabilitated patients had significantly more absolute and relative LBM at four and eight-weeks post-surgery in models controlling for age, sex, baseline BMI, baseline 6MWT, and compliance to the postoperative intervention.
Trimodal prehabilitation attenuated the post-surgical LBM loss compared to the loss observed in patients who received the rehabilitation intervention. Patients who receive neither intervention (i.e., standard of care) would be likely to lose more LBM. Offering a prehabilitation program to colorectal cancer patients awaiting resection is a useful strategy to mitigate the impact of the surgical stress response on lean tissue in an ERAS setting, and, in turn, might have a positive impact on the cancer care course.
NCT02586701 &NCT01356264 (clinicaltrials.gov).