Search

Abstract Introduction The COVID‐19 pandemic impacted healthcare organizations, necessitating a rapid transition from in‐person to virtual care. Our study explored the feasibility of a mixed in‐person/telerehabilitation intervention for cancer patients and its effects on cancer‐related fatigue (CRF), quality of life (QoL), physical function, patient satisfaction, and perceived usefulness. Methods TRACE 2020 is an observational prospective study that enrolled adult cancer patients, between January 2021 and March 2023, who were eligible for a rehabilitation program to be provided also in telerehabilitation. Patients were assessed at baseline and after the rehabilitation program. Adherence to sessions, reasons for non‐adherence and adverse events were collected. Results Of the 23 patients enrolled, 87% received a mixed intervention, with an average of 60% in‐person sessions and 40% telerehabilitation sessions. Adherence was very high (91%). Evaluation scales showed an improvement in CRF, QoL, and lower limb strength and a relevant increase in patients' level of physical activity (PA). Most patients reported good satisfaction; the few criticisms mainly concerned difficulties in connectivity, lack of physical contact and difficulties in understanding how to perform exercises during telerehabilitation sessions. The physiotherapist underlined the usefulness of the innovative approach and suggested ways to facilitate future implementation. Conclusion A mixed intervention including telerehabilitation is feasible and accepted by cancer patients. It may have a positive effect on their CRF, QoL, and level of PA and render patient care more flexible. The findings suggest what characteristics the target population for telerehabilitation should have, in order to integrate telerehabilitation in standard care for cancer patients.

Background: Disability related to incurable cancer affects over a million Europeans each year and people with cancer rank loss of function among the most common unmet supportive care needs. Objectives: To test the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an integrated short-term palliative rehabilitation intervention, to optimise function and quality of life in people affected by incurable cancer. Design: This is a multinational, parallel group, randomised, controlled, assessor blind, superiority trial. Methods: The INSPIRE consortium brings together leaders in palliative care, oncology and rehabilitation from partner organisations across Europe, with complementary expertise in health service research, trials of complex interventions, mixed-method evaluations, statistics and economics. Partnership with leading European civil society organisations ensures citizen engagement and dissemination at the highest level. We will conduct a multinational randomised controlled trial across five European countries, recruiting participants to assess the effectiveness of palliative rehabilitation for people with incurable cancer on the primary outcome – quality of life – and secondary outcomes including disability, symptom burden and goal attainment. To support trial conduct and enhance analysis of trial data, we will also conduct: comparative analysis of current integration of rehabilitation across oncology and palliative care services; mixed-method evaluations of equity and inclusivity, processes and implementation for the intervention, at patient, health service and health system levels. Finally, we will conduct an evidence synthesis, incorporating INSPIRE findings, and a Delphi consensus to develop an international framework for palliative rehabilitation practice and policy, incorporating indicators, core interventions, outcomes and integration methods. Scientific contribution: If positive, the trial could produce a scalable and equitable intervention to improve function and quality of life in people with incurable cancer and reduce the burden of care for their families. It could also upskill the practitioners involved and motivate future research questions. The intervention could be adapted and integrated into different health systems using existing staff and services, with little or no additional cost.

Abstract Inflammatory burden is associated with COVID-19 severity and outcomes. Residual computed tomography (CT) lung abnormalities have been reported after COVID-19. The aim was to evaluate the association between inflammatory burden during COVID-19 and residual lung CT abnormalities collected on follow-up CT scans performed 2–3 and 6–7 months after COVID-19, in severe COVID-19 pneumonia survivors. C-reactive protein (CRP) curves describing inflammatory burden during the clinical course were built, and CRP peaks, velocities of increase, and integrals were calculated. Other putative determinants were age, sex, mechanical ventilation, lowest PaO2/FiO2 ratio, D-dimer peak, and length of hospital stay (LOS). Of the 259 included patients (median age 65 years; 30.5% females), 202 (78%) and 100 (38.6%) had residual, predominantly non-fibrotic, abnormalities at 2–3 and 6–7 months, respectively. In age- and sex-adjusted models, best CRP predictors for residual abnormalities were CRP peak (odds ratio [OR] for one standard deviation [SD] increase = 1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.23–2.62) at 2–3 months and CRP integral (OR for one SD increase = 2.24; 95%CI = 1.53–3.28) at 6–7 months. Hence, inflammation is associated with short- and medium-term lung damage in COVID-19. Other severity measures, including mechanical ventilation and LOS, but not D-dimer, were mediators of the relationship between CRP and residual abnormalities.

Abstract Background Post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) affect millions of individuals worldwide. Rehabilitation interventions could support individuals during the recovery phase of COVID-19, but a comprehensive understanding of this new disease and its associated needs is crucial. This qualitative study investigated the experience of individuals who had been hospitalized for COVID-19, focusing on those needs and difficulties they perceived as most urgent. Methods This naturalistic qualitative study was part of a single-center mix-method cross-sectional study (REACT) conducted in Italy during the first peak of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The qualitative data collection took place through a telephone interview conducted 3 months after hospital discharge. The experience of individuals discharged after hospitalization for COVID-19 was investigated through the main research question – “Tell me, how has it been going since you were discharged?”. Two secondary questions investigated symptoms, activities, and participation. Data were recorded and transcribed verbatim within 48 h. An empirical phenomenological approach was used by the researchers, who independently analyzed the data and, through consensus, developed an interpretative model to answer the research question. Translation occurred after data was analyzed. Results During the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, 784 individuals with COVID-19 were discharged from the hospitals of the Local Health Authority of the Province of Reggio Emilia (Italy); 446 were excluded due to the presence of acute or chronic conditions causing disability other than COVID-19 (n. 339), inability to participate in the study procedures (n. 56), insufficient medical documentation to allow for screening (n. 21), discharge to residential facilities (n. 25), and pregnancy (n. 5). Overall, 150 individuals consented to participate in the REACT study, and 56 individuals (60.7% male, average age 62.8 years ±11.8) were interviewed in June–July 2020, up to data saturation. Persistent symptoms, feelings of isolation, fear and stigma, emotional distress, a fatalistic attitude, and return to (adapted) life course were the key themes that characterized the participants’ experience after hospital discharge. Conclusions The experience as narrated by the participants in this study confirms the persistence of symptoms described in PASC and highlights the sense of isolation and psychological distress. These phenomena may trigger a vicious circle, but the participants also reported adaptation processes that allowed them to gradually return to their life course. Whether all individuals are able to rapidly activate these mechanisms and whether rehabilitation can help to break this vicious circle by improving residual symptoms remain to be seen. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.com NCT04438239.

Objectives COVID-19 can result in persistent symptoms leaving potential rehabilitation needs unmet. This study aims to describe persistent symptoms and health status of individuals hospitalised for COVID-19 according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health domains of impairments, limitations in activity, and participation restrictions.Design Cross-sectional study consisting in a telephone interview 3 months after hospital discharge.Setting This study was conducted during the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic by the Local Health Authority of Reggio Emilia (Italy).Participants Adult individuals discharged from hospital between April and June 2020 after COVID-19. Exclusion criteria: hospitalisation for reasons other than COVID-19, inability to participate in the study, concomitant acute or chronic conditions causing disability.Primary and secondary outcome measures We assessed: dyspnoea (Medical Research Council), fatigue (Fatigue Severity Scale), mood disturbances (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), limitations in activity (Barthel Index) and participation restrictions (Reintegration to Normal Living Index). We also collected data on sociodemographic characteristics, health status prior to COVID-19, COVID-related clinical manifestations and hospital care pathway up to discharge, rehabilitation interventions, accidental falls and emergency room access.Results 149 participants (men, 62%; average age 62 (±11) years) were enrolled, 35 of which (23%) were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) while hospitalised. Three months after hospital discharge, nearly half of the participants still suffered from dyspnoea (44%) or fatigue (39%). Almost all individuals (91.2%) recovered a good level of independence in activity of daily living, but 76% still suffered participation restrictions. Female sex was significantly associated with worse outcomes for all symptoms.Conclusions Individuals who had moderate or severe COVID-19 may perceive persistent symptoms which may result in reduced social participation. Sex differences should be monitored, as women may recover more slowly than men.Trial registration number NCT04438239.

Introduction Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiotherapy (RT) increase survival in selected patients with prostate cancer. Nevertheless, the side effects of these therapies are associated with an increased risk of accidental falls and fractures and a decreased quality of life. Preliminary evidence suggests that physical exercise can be a valid strategy to reduce the side effects of ADT and RT in men with prostate cancer. Despite this knowledge, most patients with prostate cancer are insufficiently active, and there is a lack of data on the safety and adherence to the recommended dose of physical exercise. This study protocol is designed to examine the feasibility and safety of a multicomponent experimental physical exercise intervention targeting psychophysical and cognitive functions and the quality of life in this population.Methods and analysis This is a pilot feasibility study. Twenty-five men currently treated with ADT and RT for prostate cancer will be invited to participate in a 20-week, multicomponent physical exercise intervention, including supervised and unsupervised exercise sessions and meeting the current recommendation for exercise in cancer. The primary outcomes are physical exercise feasibility (recruitment, adherence and drop-out rates) and safety (adverse events related and unrelated to the intervention). The secondary outcomes are muscle strength, balance, fatigue, symptoms of anxiety and depression, cognitive function, quality of life, and patient satisfaction. We will also record the number of accidental falls and fractures occurring during the intervention and at 1 year of follow-up.Ethics and dissemination The study has received ethics approval from The Area Vasta Nord Local Ethics Committee (Province of Reggio Emilia, 23 June 2020, Number 520/2020/SPER/IRCCSRE). Recruitment began in September 2020 and will be completed in September 2021. The results will be disseminated through scientific journals and conference presentations.Trial registration number NCT04500080.

Introduction Half of all patients with cancer experience cachexia, with the prevalence rising above 80% in the last weeks of life. Cancer cachexia (CC) is a complex relational experience that involves the patient–family dyad. There are no studies on the association between the psychoeducational component and the rehabilitative component of dyads for supporting more functional relationships in the management of CC.The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of a psychoeducational intervention combined with a rehabilitative intervention on dyads.The secondary objective is to improve the quality of life (QoL) and acceptability of the intervention.Methods and analysis This mixed-methods study with a nonpharmacological interventional prospective includes 30 consecutive cancer patients with cachexia and refractory cachexia and their caregivers, assisted by the Specialised Palliative Care Team. The recruitment will last 1 year. The intervention involves two components: (1) psychoeducational intervention: 3 weekly face-to-face consultations between dyads and trained nurses to help the dyads cope with involuntary weight loss and strengthening dyadic coping resources and (2) rehabilitation intervention: 3 biweekly educational sessions between dyads and trained physiotherapists focused on self-management, goal-setting, physical activity with three home exercise sessions per week.The primary endpoint will be in adherence to the intervention, indicated by a level of completion greater than or equal to 50% in both components. The secondary endpoints will be QoL (Functional Assessment of Anorexia-Cachexia Therapy), caregiver burden (Zarit Burden), physical performance (Hand-Grip strength and 30 seconds sit-to-stand test), and the acceptability of the intervention (ad hoc semi-structured interviews with the dyads and the healthcare professionals).Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the Ethics Committee Area Vasta Emilia Nord, Azienda USL-IRCSS Reggio Emilia, Italy, number: 73/2019/SPER/IRCCSRE. The authors will provide the dissemination of the results through publication in international scientific journals.Trial registration number NCT04153019.

Introduction Hematologic malignancies account for nearly 8% of new cancer diagnosis in Italy. Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is one of the most distressing symptoms reported by patients with cancer. As CRF has a multifactorial etiology, physical activity and therapeutic education may be beneficial for managing CRF, both during and after cancer treatment. However, there is a lack of evidence specific to hematologic malignancies. This paper describes the protocol of a feasibility study on Therapeutic Education and Physical Activity (TEPA) intervention to support self-management of CRF in patients with hematologic malignancies. Methods TEPA was addressed to newly diagnosed adult individuals with hematologic malignancy able to take part in a rehabilitation programme at the AUSL-IRCCS of Reggio Emilia. The protocol was developed in 2 phases. Phase I was an observational cohort study involving a convenience sample of 10 participants with the aim to evaluate the feasibility of the assessment schedule and to register longitudinal clinical data regarding CRF (FACIT-F), psychologic distress (NCCN Distress Thermometer), QoL (EORTC QLQ-C30), physical performance (TUG and 6MWT) and habitual level of physical activity during first months after diagnosis. Phase II (underway) is a feasibility randomized controlled trial (TEPA) involving a convenience sample of 40 participants and comparing 2 parallel active interventions (Therapeutic Education versus Therapeutic Education and Physical Activity) on top of usual care. The primary aim is to estimate the feasibility of TEPA, measured by the adherence rate to the intervention. Secondary aims are: to estimate the effect size of TEPA in terms of changes in CRF, psychological distress, QoL, physical performance and habitual level of physical activity (measured as in Phase I); to collect patient satisfaction, perception of usefulness of the TEPA intervention and data on long-term adherence to an active lifestyle. Data are collected in both phases at the time of diagnosis and then at 1-, 3- (completion of intervention) and 7-month follow-up. Discussion Data on feasibility and effect size of TEPA will be analyzed upon completion of Phase II, allowing us to design a large, adequately powered RCT to verify the effectiveness of this intervention on CRF management in patients with hematologic cancer. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov; Trial registration number: NCT03403075

Abstract Background Non-small cell lung cancer is the most common type of lung cancer. Surgery is proven to be the most effective treatment in early stages, despite its potential impact on quality of life. Pulmonary rehabilitation, either before or after surgery, is associated with reduced morbidity related symptoms and improved exercise capacity, lung function and quality of life. Methods We describe the study protocol for the open-label randomized controlled trial we are conducting on patients affected by primary lung cancer (stages I-II) eligible for surgical treatment. The control group receives standard care consisting in one educational session before surgery and early inpatient postoperative physiotherapy. The treatment group receives, in addition to standard care, intensive rehabilitation involving 14 preoperative sessions (6 outpatient and 8 home-based) and 39 postoperative sessions (15 outpatient and 24 home-based) with aerobic, resistance and respiratory training, as well as scar massage and group bodyweight exercise training. Assessments are performed at baseline, the day before surgery and one month and six months after surgery. The main outcome is the long-term exercise capacity measured with the Six-Minute Walk Test; short-term exercise capacity, lung function, postoperative morbidity, length of hospital stay, quality of life (Short Form 12), mood disturbances (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) and pain (Numeric Rating Scale) are also recorded and analysed. Patient compliance and treatment-related side effects are also collected. Statistical analyses will be performed according to the intention-to-treat approach. T-test for independent samples will be used for continuous variables after assessment of normality of distribution. Chi-square test will be used for categorical variables. Expecting a 10% dropout rate, assuming α of 5% and power of 80%, we planned to enrol 140 patients to demonstrate a statistically significant difference of 25 m at Six-Minute Walk Test. Discussion Pulmonary Resection and Intensive Rehabilitation study (PuReAIR) will contribute significantly in investigating the effects of perioperative rehabilitation on exercise capacity, symptoms, lung function and long-term outcomes in surgically treated lung cancer patients. This study protocol will facilitate interpretation of future results and wide application of evidence-based practice. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Registry n. NCT02405273 [31.03.2015].

Introduction. To determine effect size and feasibility of experimental occupational therapy (OT) intervention in addition to standard care in a population of complex patients undergoing rehabilitation in a hospital-home-based setting. Method. 40 complex patients admitted to the rehabilitation ward of the Local Health Authority-Research Institute of Reggio Emilia (Italy) were randomized in a parallel-group, open-label controlled trial. Experimental OT targeting occupational needs in the areas of self-care, productivity, and leisure was delivered by occupational therapists. Standard care consisted of task-oriented rehabilitation delivered by a multiprofessional team. Results. The experimental OT intervention was completed by 75% of patients assigned to this group. The average changes in the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) performance score significantly and clinically favored experimental OT [−3,06 (−4.50; −1.61); delta>2 points, resp.]. Similar trends were detected for COPM satisfaction and independence in instrumental activities of daily living (ADL). At follow-up, level of social participation was higher for patients treated with experimental OT (p=0.043) than for controls. Conclusions. Experimental OT was feasible in complex patients in a hospital-home-based setting. It ameliorated both patients’ performance and satisfaction in carrying out relevant activities and improved independence in instrumental ADL. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02677766.

Surgical resection appears to be the most effective treatment for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. Recent studies suggest that perioperative pulmonary rehabilitation improves functional capacity, reduces mortality and postoperative complications and enhances recovery and quality of life in operated patients. Our aim is to analyse and identify the most recent evidence-based physical exercise interventions, performed before or after surgery. We searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PsycINFO. We included randomised controlled trials aimed at assessing efficacy of exercise-training programmes; physical therapy interventions had to be described in detail in order to be reproducible. Characteristics of studies and programmes, results and outcome data were extracted. Six studies were included, one describing preoperative rehabilitation and three assessing postoperative intervention. It seems that the best preoperative physical therapy training should include aerobic and strength training with a duration of 2–4 weeks. Although results showed improvement in exercise performance after preoperative pulmonary rehabilitation, it was not possible to identify the best preoperative intervention due to paucity of clinical trials in this area. Physical training programmes differed in every postoperative study with conflicting results, so comparison is difficult. Current literature shows inconsistent results regarding preoperative or postoperative physical exercise in patients undergoing lung resection. Even though few randomised trials were retrieved, treatment protocols were difficult to compare due to variability in design and implementation. Further studies with larger samples and better methodological quality are urgently needed to assess efficacy of both preoperative and postoperative exercise programmes.