Introduction. Surgical resection in patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) may be associated with significant morbidity, functional limitations, and decreased quality of life. Objectives. The safety and feasibility of a preoperative and early postoperative rehabilitation program in patients operated for NSCLC was determined in a nonhospital setting, with focus on high-intensity interval exercise. Methods. Forty patients with biopsy-proven NSCLC stages I to IIIa referred for surgical resection at the Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery RT, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 groups (3 intervention groups and 1 control group). The preoperative intervention consisted of a home-based exercise program, while the postoperative exercise program comprised a supervised group exercise program involving resistance and high-intensity interval cardiorespiratory exercise 2 hours weekly for 12 weeks combined with individual counseling. The study endpoints were inclusion rate, adherence, and number of adverse events. Results. Forty patients (of 124 screened; 32%) were included and randomized into the 4 groups. The postoperative exercise was completed by 73% of the patients randomized to this intervention. No adverse events were observed, indicating that the early postoperative exercise program is safe. The preoperative home-based exercise program was not feasible due to interfering diagnostic procedures and fast-track surgery that left only 1 to 2 weeks between diagnosis and surgery. Conclusion. The early postoperative exercise program for patients with NSCLC was safe and feasible, but in a fast-track set up, a preoperative home-based exercise program was not feasible for this population.

The purpose of this study was to explore the lived experiences of people infected with the coronavirus in Denmark during the first phase of the pandemic. An explorative qualitative design underpinned by a phenomenological hermeneutical approach was applied. Fifteen individuals with confirmed COVID-19 infection were included and interviewed individually by telephone. Analyses were inspired by Ricoeur’s interpretation theory. The study illuminated how being diagnosed with COVID-19 was experienced not just a virus infecting the participants’ biology; it was also a threat to their existence and bodily perception as well as an interference in ordinary social relationships. Beyond a supportive approach, the participants experienced being a special case where people around them acted with excitement and curiosity. Responsibility for existential and emotional care after COVID-19 has been placed with the individual ill person and within their ordinary social circle. We suggest follow-up and rehabilitation for people during and after COVID-19 to support recovery.

Background: End-of-life (EOL) conversations are highly important for patients living with life-threatening diseases and for their relatives. Talking about the EOL is associated with reduced costs and better quality of care in the final weeks of life. However, there is therefore a need for further clarification of the actual wishes of patients and their relatives concerning EOL conversations in an acute hospital setting.Aim: The purpose of this study was to explore the wishes of patients and their relatives with regard to talking about the EOL in an acute hospital setting when living with a life-threatening disease.Methods: This study is a qualitative study using semi-structured in-depth interviews. A total of 17 respondents (11 patients and six spouses) participated. The patients were identified by the medical staff in a medical and surgical ward using SPICT™. The interview questions were focused on the respondents’ thoughts on and wishes about their future lives, as well as on their wishes regarding talking about the EOL in a hospital setting.Results: This study revealed that the wish to talk about the EOL differed widely between respondents. Impairment to the patients’ everyday lives received the main focus, whereas talking about EOL was secondary. Conversations on EOL were an individual matter and ranged from not wanting to think about the EOL, to being ready to plan the funeral and expecting the healthcare professionals to be very open about the EOL. The conversations thus varied between superficial communication and crossing boundaries.Conclusion: The wish to talk about the EOL in an acute hospital setting is an individual matter and great diversity exists. This individualistic stance requires the development of conversational tools that can assist both the patients and the relatives who wish to have an EOL conversation and those who do not. At the same time, staff should be trained in initiating and facilitating EOL discussions.