To determine the effect of interventions on physical activity levels of patients awaiting abdominal resection surgery using self-reported as well as device-measured outcome measures.
Data source
PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched on the 18th of April 2023 up to April 2023 for studies on interventions to promote physical activity during the preoperative phase.
Review methods
Studies were included if pre- and post-intervention physical activity was measured between diagnosis and abdominal surgery. Risk of bias was assessed by the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) assessment tool for trials. Meta-analyses were performed to assess the effect of the pre-surgery activity promoting interventions on self-reported and device-measured physical activity.
Results
Seventeen studies were included in the analysis with 452 subjects in the intervention groups. The random-effect meta-analysis showed a moderate improvement in intervention groups measures in pre-surgery physical activity levels compared to the baseline (SMD = 0.67, [CI = 0.30;1.03], I2 = 79%). The self-reported subgroup meta-analysis showed the largest increase in performed physical activity, (SMD = 0.78, [CI = 0.4;1.15], I2 = 79%) whilst non-significant increase was shown in the device-measured subgroup (SMD = 0.16, [CI = −0.64;0.97], I2 = 58%).
Conclusion
Increasing physical activity in the preoperative phase is feasible. Self-reported physical activity outcome measures show larger effects compared to device-measured outcome measures. More high-quality research should be performed utilizing objective measures.
KommalapatiATellaSHGoyalG, et al.Contemporary management of localized resectable pancreatic cancer. Cancers (Basel)2018; 10(1): 1–15.
2.
JanssenTLde VriesJLodderP, et al.The effects of elective aortic repair, colorectal cancer surgery and subsequent postoperative delirium on long-term quality of life, cognitive functioning and depressive symptoms in older patients. Aging Ment Heal [Internet]2021; 25(5): 896–905.
3.
PintoAFaizODavisR, et al.Surgical complications and their impact on patients’ psychosocial well-being: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open2016; 6(2):e007224. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007224.
4.
MinaDSScheede-BergdahlCGillisC,et al.Optimization of surgical outcomes with prehabilitation. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab2015; 40(9): 966–969.
5.
BrandeisJMLitwinMSBurnisonCM,et al.Quality of life outcomes after brachytherapy for early stage prostate cancer. J Urol2000; 163(3): 851–857.
6.
Phillips-ButeBMathewJPBlumenthalJA, et al.Association of neurocognitive function and quality of life 1 year after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. Psychosom Med2006; 68(3): 369–375.
7.
GalvãoDANewtonRU. Review of exercise intervention studies in cancer patients. J Clin Oncol2005; 23(4): 899–909.
8.
BullFCAl-AnsariSSBiddleS, et al.World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Br J Sports Med2020; 54(24): 1451–1462.
9.
MyliusCFKrijnenWPTakkenT, et al.Objectively measured preoperative physical activity is associated with time to functional recovery after hepato-pancreato-biliary cancer surgery: a pilot study. Perioper Med2021; 10(1): 1–12.
10.
WestMAParryMGLythgoeD, et al.Cardiopulmonary exercise testing for the prediction of morbidity risk after rectal cancer surgery. Br J Surg2014; 101(9): 1166–1172.
11.
LeeLSchwartzmanKCarliF, et al.The association of the distance walked in 6 min with pre-operative peak oxygen consumption and complications 1 month after colorectal resection. Anaesthesia2013; 68(8): 811–816.
12.
NuttCLRussellJC. Use of the pre-operative shuttle walk test to predict morbidity and mortality after elective major colorectal surgery. Anaesthesia2012; 67(8): 839–849.
13.
SaratzisAShakespeareJJonesO, et al.Pre-operative functional cardiovascular reserve is associated with acute kidney injury after intervention. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg [Internet]2017; 53(5): 717–724.
14.
WilsonRJTDaviesSYatesD, et al.Impaired functional capacity is associated with all-cause mortality after major elective intra-abdominal surgery. Br J Anaesth2010; 105(3): 297–303.
15.
SnowdenCPPrentisJJacquesB, et al.Cardiorespiratory fitness predicts mortality and hospital length of stay after major elective surgery in older people. Ann Surg2013; 257(6): 999–1004.
16.
HoogeboomTJDronkersJJHulzebosEHJ,et al.Merits of exercise therapy before and after major surgery. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol2014; 27(2): 161–166.
17.
SkenderSOseJChang-ClaudeJ, et al.Accelerometry and physical activity questionnaires - A systematic review. BMC Public Health [Internet]2016; 16(1): 1–10.
18.
SevesBLHoekstraFSchoenmakersJWA, et al.Test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of the adapted short QUestionnaire to ASsess health-enhancing physical activity (adapted-SQUASH) in adults with disabilities. J Sports Sci [Internet]2021; 39(8): 875–886.
19.
HarrisTJOwenCGVictorCR, et al.A comparison of questionnaire, accelerometer, and pedometer: measures in older people. Med Sci Sports Exerc2009; 41(7): 1392–1402.
20.
HelmerhorstHJFBrageSWarrenJ, et al.A systematic review of reliability and objective criterion-related validity of physical activity questionnaires. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act2012; 9: 103. DOI: 10.1186/1479-5868-9-103.
21.
SemberVMehKSorićM, et al.Validity and reliability of international physical activity questionnaires for adults across EU countries: systematic review and meta analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health2020; 17(19): 1–23.
22.
AlthubaitiA. Information bias in health research: definition, pitfalls, and adjustment methods. J Multidiscip Healthc2016; 9: 211–217.
23.
SylviaLGBernsteinEEHubbardJL, et al.Practical guide to measuring physical activity. J Acad Nutr Diet2014; 114(2): 199–208.
24.
MoranJGuinanEMcCormickP, et al.The ability of prehabilitation to influence postoperative outcome after intra-abdominal operation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surgery2016; 160(5): 1189–1201.
25.
LutherAGabrielJWatsonRP,et al.The impact of total body prehabilitation on post-operative outcomes after Major abdominal surgery: a systematic review. World J Surg [Internet]2018; 42(9): 2781–2791.
26.
HijaziYGondalUAzizO. A systematic review of prehabilitation programs in abdominal cancer surgery. Int J Surg [Internet]2017; 39: 156–162.
27.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJ, et al.Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med2009; 6(7): e1000097. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
28.
FennellC. Effects of supervised training compared to unsupervised training on physical activity, muscular endurance, and cardiovascular parameters. MOJ Orthop Rheumatol2016; 5(4): 265–270.
de MortonNA. The PEDro scale is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials: a demographic study. Aust J Physiother [Internet]2009; 55(2): 129–133.
31.
R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing [Internet]. Vienna, Austra; 2013. Available from: http://www.r-project.org.
Hedges LV. Distribution theory for glass’s estimator of effect size and related estimators. J Educ Stat1981; 6(2): 107–128.
34.
HigginsJPTThompsonSG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med2002; 21(11): 1539–1558.
35.
HallidayLJDoganayEWynter-BlythV, et al.Adherence to Pre-operative exercise and the response to prehabilitation in oesophageal cancer patients. J Gastrointest Surg Off J Soc Surg Aliment Tract2021; 25(4): 890–899.
Bousquet-DionGAwasthiRLoiselleSÈ, et al.Evaluation of supervised multimodal prehabilitation programme in cancer patients undergoing colorectal resection: a randomized control trial. Acta Oncol (Madr) [Internet]2018; 57(6): 849–859.
38.
MougSJMutrieNBarrySJE, et al.Prehabilitation is feasible in patients with rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and may minimize physical deterioration: results from the REx trial. Colorectal Dis2019; 21(5): 548–562.
39.
SteffensDYoungJBeckenkampPR, et al.Feasibility and acceptability of a preoperative exercise program for patients undergoing major cancer surgery: results from a pilot randomized controlled trial. Pilot Feasibility Stud2021; 7(1): 27.
SinghFNewtonRUBakerMK, et al.Feasibility and efficacy of presurgical exercise in survivors of rectal cancer scheduled to receive curative resection. Clin Colorectal Cancer [Internet]2017; 16(4): 358–365.
42.
GillisCLiCLeeL, et al.Prehabilitation versus rehabilitation: a randomized control trial in patients undergoing colorectal resection for cancer. Anesthesiology2014; 121(5): 937–947.
43.
WaterlandJLIsmailHGrangerCL, et al.Prehabilitation in high-risk patients scheduled for major abdominal cancer surgery: a feasibility study. Perioper Med2022; 11(1): 1–13.
44.
ChmeloJPhillipsAWGreystokeA, et al.A feasibility trial of prehabilitation before oesophagogastric cancer surgery using a multi-component home-based exercise programme: the ChemoFit study. Pilot Feasibility Stud [Internet]2022; 8(1): 1–10.
45.
SuenMLiewATurnerJD, et al.Short-term multimodal prehabilitation improves functional capacity for colorectal cancer patients prior to surgery. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol 2022; 18(2): e103–e110. DOI: 10.1111/ajco.1356410.1111/ajco.13564
46.
TimmermanHde GrootJFHulzebosHJ, et al.Feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of preoperative therapeutic exercise in patients with cancer: a pragmatic study. Physiother Theory Pract2011; 27(2): 117–124.
47.
CarliFCharleboisPSteinB, et al.Randomized clinical trial of prehabilitation in colorectal surgery. Br J Surg2010; 97(8): 1187–1197.
48.
WestMALoughneyLLythgoeD, et al.Effect of prehabilitation on objectively measured physical fitness after neoadjuvant treatment in preoperative rectal cancer patients: a blinded interventional pilot study. Br J Anaesth2015; 114(2): 244–251.
49.
LoughneyLWestMADimitrovBD, et al.Physical activity levels in locally advanced rectal cancer patients following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and an exercise training programme before surgery: a pilot study. Perioper Med (London, England)2017; 6: 3.
50.
LiCCarliFLeeL, et al.Impact of a trimodal prehabilitation program on functional recovery after colorectal cancer surgery: a pilot study. Surg Endosc2013; 27(4): 1072–1082.
51.
Ngo-HuangAParkerNHWangX, et al.Home-based exercise during preoperative therapy for pancreatic cancer. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg2017; 402(8): 1175–1185.
52.
ConnVSHafdahlARMehrDR. Interventions to increase physical activity among healthy adults: meta-analysis of outcomes. Am J Public Health2011; 101(4): 751–758.
53.
ConnVSHafdahlARBrownSA,et al.Meta-analysis of patient education interventions to increase physical activity among chronically ill adults. Patient Educ Couns2008; 70(2): 157–172.
54.
HowlettNTrivediDTroopNA,et al.Are physical activity interventions for healthy inactive adults effective in promoting behavior change and maintenance, and which behavior change techniques are effective? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Transl Behav Med2019; 9(1): 147–157.
55.
KahnEBRamseyLTBrownsonRC, et al.The Effectiveness of Interventions to Increase Physical Activity A Systematic Review. Am J Prev Med2002; 22(4S): 73–107. DOI: 10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00434-8.
56.
SevickMADunnALMorrowMS, et al.Cost-effectiveness of lifestyle and structured exercise interventions in sedentary adults. Results of project ACTIVE. Am J Prev Med2000; 19(1): 1–8.
57.
Stults-KolehmainenMASinhaR. The effects of stress on physical activity and exercise. Sports Med2014; 44: 81–121.
58.
MichieSWestRShealsK,et al.Evaluating the effectiveness of behavior change techniques in health-related behavior: a scoping review of methods used. Transl Behav Med2018; 8(2): 212–224.
59.
ColomboDSuso-RiberaCFernández-ÁlvarezJ, et al.Affect recall bias: being resilient by distorting reality. Cognit Ther Res [Internet]2020; 44(5): 906–918.
60.
DoumaJAJde BeaufortMBKampshoffCS, et al.Physical activity in patients with cancer: self-report versus accelerometer assessments. Support Care Cancer2020; 28(8): 3701–3709.
61.
GrimmP. Social Desirability Bias. 2010;(1999):2010.
62.
RedelmeierDADickinsonVM. Determining whether a patient is feeling better: pitfalls from the science of human perception. J Gen Intern Med2011; 26(8): 900–906.
HerbertRDBøK. Analysis of quality of interventions in systematic reviews. Br Med J2005; 331(7515): 507–509.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
