Background: Prehabilitation services assist patients in preparing for surgery, yet access to these services are often limited by geographical factors. Enabling rural and regional patients to access specialist surgical prehabilitation support with the use of telehealth technology has the potential to overcome health inequities and improve post-operative outcomes. Aim: To evaluate the current and likely future impact of a telehealth preoperative education package for patients preparing for major abdominal cancer surgery. Methods: A telehealth alternative to a hospital based pre-operative education session was developed and implemented at a dedicated cancer hospital. Adult patients (≥18 years) scheduled for elective major cancer surgery were offered this telehealth alternative. Impact evaluation was conducted using the RE-AIM framework. Results: To date, 35 participants have consented to participate in the study. Thirty-one participants attended the intervention; 24 (69%) residing in rural or regional areas. Twenty-four (77%) reported that if given a choice they would prefer the online session as opposed to attending the hospital in person. The majority (97%) reported they would recommend the intervention to others preparing for surgery. Session information was recalled by all 26 participants and 77% of participants reported acting on recommendations 2 weeks after the session. Lessons learnt and recommendations for providers implementing similar programs are reported. Conclusion: Telehealth alternatives to hospital based pre-operative education are well received by patients preparing for major cancer surgery. We make seven recommendations to improve implementation. Further evaluation of implementation strategies alongside clinical effectiveness in future studies is essential. Trial registration: ACTRN12620000096954, 04/02/2020.

Background: Patients presenting for major surgery with low cardiorespiratory fitness (deconditioning) and other modifiable risk factors are at increased risk of postoperative complications. This study investigated the feasibility of delivering prehabilitation in high-risk patients scheduled for major abdominal cancer surgery. Methods: Eligible patients in this single-center cohort study included patients with poor fitness (objectively assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing, CPET) scheduled for elective major abdominal cancer surgery. Patients were recruited to participate in a prehabilitation program that spanned up to 6 weeks pre-operatively and comprised aerobic and resistance exercise training, breathing exercise, and nutritional support. The primary outcome assessed pre-specified feasibility targets: recruitment >70%, retention >85%, and intervention adherence >70%. Secondary outcomes were assessed for improved pre-operative functional status and health-related quality of life and for postoperative complications. Results: Eighty-two (34%) out of 238 patients screened between April 2018 and December 2019 were eligible for recruitment. Fifty (61%) patients (52% males) with a median age of 71 (IQR, 63–77) years participated in the study. Baseline oxygen consumption the at anaerobic threshold and at peak exercise (mean±SD: 9.8±1.8 and 14.0±2.9 mL/kg/min, respectively) confirmed the deconditioned state of the study cohort. The retention rate within the prehabilitation program was 84%, with 42 participants returning for repeat CPET testing. While >60% of participants preferred to do home-based prehabilitation, adherence to the intervention was low—with only 12 (28%) and 15 (35%) of patients having self-reported compliance >70% with their exercise prescriptions. Conclusion: Our prehabilitation program in high-risk cancer surgery patients did not achieve pre-specified targets for recruitment, retention, and self-reported program adherence. These findings underpin the importance of implementation research and strategies for the prehabilitation programs in major surgery. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12620000073909) retrospectively registered.

Context Children born very preterm (<32 weeks’ gestation) have increased risk of neurodevelopmental difficulties compared with those born at term. While various neonatal exposures have been linked with later developmental challenges, identifying those at risk of difficulties later in childhood remains a challenge but is essential for targeting early intervention and counselling families. Objective To systematically review and synthesise the evidence regarding early medical and environmental factors for neurodevelopmental impairment, cognitive, motor and behavioural outcomes for children born very preterm. Design Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed were searched for articles between 1 January 1990 and 29 April 2024 reporting on a representative, prospective geographical, network-based or multisite cohorts of children born <32 weeks’ gestation. Main outcome measures Neurodevelopmental impairment, cognitive, motor and emotional-behavioural functioning in children aged 36 months to 18 years. Data were extracted and reported descriptively due to heterogeneity in study measures. Results From 18 012 records, 29 studies from 16 cohorts were included. Brain injury, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, male sex and lower socioeconomic status were the most consistent predictors of neurodevelopmental impairment, IQ, working memory, cerebral palsy, fine motor skills and some behavioural measures. Emotional problems were generally not associated with neonatal variables investigated to date. Conclusion Numerous factors are independently associated with childhood outcomes after being born very preterm, with specific predictors varying across domains of functioning and limited available evidence for some predictor-outcome combinations. Knowledge of these factors may assist in targeting those at highest risk for closer surveillance and early intervention. PROSPERO registration number CRD42022368957

Background and Objective Consumer engagement improves research quality and relevance but can be difficult to implement. This study aimed to explore the motivations and understand the barriers, if any, experienced by consumers before and when partnering with cancer research teams. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with consumers and the results analysed thematically. Two groups were recruited: consumers who were members of the consumer registry and patients who did not have previous experience of being a consumer in a researcher partnership. Results Twenty-one interviews were conducted with a total of 22 participants aged between 26 and 74 years. Consumers motivation was driven by altruism to help others and personal benefits. Barriers to beginning and maintaining consumer engagement included consumers’ perceptions of being appreciated by researchers and meaningful communication between researchers and consumers. Conclusions Australian policy has made important steps towards consumer engagement in research. This study showed that demonstrating an appreciation for consumers and effective communication are key areas to consider when designing implementation strategies of these policies in the cancer research space in the future.

Background/Objectives: Major surgery for gastrointestinal cancer carries a 50% risk of postoperative complications. Physiotherapists commonly provide interventions to patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery for cancer with the intent of preventing complications and improving recovery. However, the evidence is unclear if physiotherapy is effective compared to providing no physiotherapy, nor if timing of service delivery during the perioperative pathway influences outcomes. The objective of this review is to evaluate and synthesise the evidence examining the effects of perioperative physiotherapy interventions delivered with prophylactic intent on postoperative outcomes compared to no treatment or early mobilisation alone. Methods: A protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO and a systematic review performed of four databases. Randomised controlled trials examining prophylactic physiotherapy interventions in adults undergoing gastrointestinal surgery for cancer were eligible for inclusion. Results: Nine publications from eight randomised controlled trials were included with a total sample of 1418 participants. Due to inconsistent reporting of other perioperative complications, meta-analysis of the effect of physiotherapy was only possible specific to postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). This found an estimated 59% reduction in risk with exposure to physiotherapy interventions (RR 0.41, 95%CI 0.23 to 0.73, p < 0.001). Sub-group analysis demonstrated that timing of delivery may be important, with physiotherapy delivered only in the preoperative phase or combined with a postoperative service significantly reducing PPC risk (RR 0.32, 95%CI 0.17 to 0.60, p < 0.001) and hospital length of stay (MD–1.4 days, 95%CI −2.24 to −0.58, p = 0.01), whilst the effect of postoperative physiotherapy alone was less certain. Conclusions: Preoperative-alone and perioperative physiotherapy is likely to minimise the risk of PPCs in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery for cancer. This challenges current traditional paradigms of providing physiotherapy only in the postoperative phase of surgery. A review with broader scope and component network analysis is required to confirm this.