Search

Introduction: There is growing evidence that prehabilitation programmes effectively improve the physical and psychological conditions of cancer patients awaiting treatment. During the pandemic, people with cancer were classed as vulnerable. To reduce risk to this population Kent and Medway Prehabilitation service transformed into a TeleHealth format. The aim of this study is to assess the impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and the costs of a digital multimodal prehabilitation programme. Methods: HRQoL was measured with the EQ-5D and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated. Costs of the prehabilitation service and inpatient care were calculated. Comparisons were made between different levels of prehabilitation received. Results: A sample of 192 individuals was included in the study Mean HRQoL improved from 69.53 at baseline to 85.71 post-rehabilitation, a 23% increase. For each additional week of prehabilitation care in cancer patients, the model predicts that the total QALYS increase by 0.02, when baseline utility is held constant. Conclusions: Prehabilitation is associated with improved HRQoL and QALYs. Our model of a multimodal digital prehabilitation program can be beneficial for patients and reduce costs for healthcare facilities even when the patients attend only a few sessions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients awaiting cancer treatment were classified as “vulnerable” and advised to shield to protect themselves from exposure to coronavirus during the pandemic. These measures can negatively impact patients. We sought to establish the feasibility and effects of a telehealth-delivered home-based prehabilitation program during the pandemic. Eligible patients were referred from multiplecenterstoaregionalprehabilitationunitprovidinghome-basedprehabilitation. Theenrolled patients received telehealth-delivered prehabilitation prior to surgery and/or during non-surgical cancer treatment, which included personalized training exercises, dietary advice, medical optimization therapies, and psychological support. The primary outcome was to investigate the feasibility of our program. The secondary outcome was to investigate the relationship between our program and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The patients completed two questionnaires (the EQ-5D-3L and the FACIT-Fatigue Scale) pre- and post-intervention. A total of 182 patients were referred during the study period. Among the 139 (76%) patients that were enrolled, 100 patients completed the program, 24 patients have still to complete, and 15 have discontinued. A total of 66 patients were able to return completed questionnaires. These patients were recruited from colorectal, urology, breast, and cardiothoracic centers. The patients significantly improved their self-perceived health (p = 0.001), and fatigue (p = 0.000). Home-based prehabilitation is a feasible intervention. The PROs improved post-intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]