Identifying relative efficacy of components of prehabilitation in adult surgical patients: protocol for a systematic review and component network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Prehabilitation is a high-priority intervention for patients, the public, clinicians and health systems. However, existing knowledge syntheses are generally low quality and do not provide insights regarding the relative efficacy of different prehabilitation components (eg, exercise, nutrition, psychosocial or cognitive interventions). The objective of the planned review is to evaluate the relative efficacy of different prehabilitation components to inform current care, implementation and future research. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will perform a systematic review and component network meta-analysis (CNMA). We will use a peer-reviewed search strategy to identify all randomised trials of prehabilitation in adult surgical patients from Ovid Medline, Embase, the CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, along with grey literature. All stages of the review and data extraction process will be performed in duplicate, following recommended best practices. To compare the relative efficacy of different prehabilitation components (prespecified as exercise, nutrition, psychosocial or cognitive interventions), we will use CNMA, an extension of network meta-analysis that allows estimation of the contributions to efficacy of each component of a multicomponent intervention through direct and indirect comparisons. We will use additive CNMA models for critical outcomes (postoperative complications, patient-reported recovery, physical recovery and length of stay); standard care will be the common reference condition. Pre-specified sensitivity and subgroup analyses will be conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review of published data does not require ethical review. Results will be disseminated via scientific conferences, peer-reviewed publications, social and traditional media and via our research network to target partners and organisations.

Nutrition education: Optimising preparation and recovery for benign oesophageal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Patients requiring upper gastrointestinal surgery for benign oesophageal conditions are at nutrition risk before and after surgery. There is a dearth of published evidence guiding clinicians on effective collaboration with patients to mitigate perioperative nutritional challenges. We conducted a qualitative study aiming to explore patients' perioperative food, nutrition, and educational experiences to guide future care. METHODS: Adult patients who had undergone elective, benign oesophageal surgery were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews within 3 weeks of hospital discharge. Interviews were transcribed and analysed with a reflexive form of inductive thematic analysis in addition to synthesised member checking. RESULTS: Interviews with 12 patients identified three major themes. First, nutrition education fosters a better surgical recovery experience: patients expressed a desire to be prepared for their upcoming surgery and engage in the recovery process with informed food choices. Most patients preferred preoperative education given limited capacity for learning during hospital admission. Second, patients have priorities for nutrition information: patients expressed that educational material should be printed, comprehensive, practical, include familiar foods and focus on managing postoperative physical symptoms. Third, food impacts social and emotional experiences of surgery: resumption of a normal diet was a sign of recovery that enabled social reintegration. Identified themes resonated with Knowles' six-core principles of andragogy. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with benign oesophageal conditions perceived nutrition education to be a vital aspect of surgical preparation and recovery. Re-designing perioperative education with patient input has the potential to improve outcomes and experiences.

A patient-led, peer-to-peer qualitative study on the psychosocial relationship between young adults with inflammatory bowel disease and food.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are chronic gastrointestinal diseases that negatively affect the enjoyment of food and engagement in social and cultural gatherings. Such experiences may promote psychosocial challenges, an aspect of IBD often overlooked and under-supported in clinical settings and research. OBJECTIVES: This study explored the psychosocial experiences that young adults with IBD have with food via a qualitative patient-led research process. METHODS: Trained patient researchers conducted this study by engaging peers via semi-structured interviews and focus groups in a three-step co-design process. Participants (n = 9) identified the research topic (SET), explored the topic and identified emerging themes (COLLECT), refined themes and made recommendations for healthcare system change (REFLECT). RESULTS: Themes that emerged included: 'Experimenting with Food', 'Evolution Over Time', 'Diet Changes are Emotional' and 'Role of Stigma'. Participants identified the significance and frustrations of repeated testing and experimenting with food compatibility, and noted nuances in food relationships as they gain knowledge and experience over time. They emphasized the importance of maintaining a sense of hope throughout and wished to impart this to newly diagnosed patients. CONCLUSION: Participants experience numerous psychosocial challenges as they strive to manage their diet, noting gaps in support available from IBD practitioners. Participants made practical recommendations for healthcare system change to improve patient outcomes, highlighting the importance of sharing stories and collaboratively including patients in the development of new services and protocols. Authors recommend further research in this area to build a body of knowledge and support that helps IBD patients maintain hope while navigating challenges with food. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The first four authors on this paper were the lead researchers in this study's design and analysis and identify as patients; they conducted the research with this identity at the forefront following a peer-to-peer research model. These authors were mentored by patient researchers who also contributed to the manuscript, and the research process itself was co-lead and directed by other patient participants and consultants. Results and recommendations coming from this paper came directly from patient participants.

Prehabilitation in adult patients undergoing surgery: an umbrella review of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: The certainty that prehabilitation improves postoperative outcomes is not clear. The objective of this umbrella review (i.e. systematic review of systematic reviews) was to synthesise and evaluate evidence for prehabilitation in improving health, experience, or cost outcomes. METHODS: We performed an umbrella review of prehabilitation systematic reviews. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Joanna Briggs Institute's database, and Web of Science were searched (inception to October 20, 2020). We included all systematic reviews of elective, adult patients undergoing surgery and exposed to a prehabilitation intervention, where health, experience, or cost outcomes were reported. Evidence certainty was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Primary syntheses of any prehabilitation were stratified by surgery type. RESULTS: From 1412 titles, 55 systematic reviews were included. For patients with cancer undergoing surgery who participate in any prehabilitation, moderate certainty evidence supports improvements in functional recovery. Low to very low certainty evidence supports reductions in complications (mixed, cardiovascular, and cancer surgery), non-home discharge (orthopaedic surgery), and length of stay (mixed, cardiovascular, and cancer surgery). There was low to very low certainty evidence that exercise prehabilitation reduces the risk of complications, non-home discharge, and length of stay. There was low to very low certainty evidence that nutritional prehabilitation reduces risk of complications, mortality, and length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Low certainty evidence suggests that prehabilitation may improve postoperative outcomes. Future low risk of bias, randomised trials, synthesised using recommended standards, are required to inform practice. Optimal patient selection, intervention design, and intervention duration must also be determined.

Patients' perspectives of prehabilitation as an extension of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) and prehabilitation programs are evidence-based and patient-focused, yet meaningful patient input could further enhance these interventions to produce superior patient outcomes and patient experiences. We conducted a qualitative study with patients who had undergone colorectal surgery under ERAS care to determine how they prepared for surgery, their views on prehabilitation and how prehabilitation could be delivered to best meet patient needs. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with adult patients who had undergone colorectal surgery under ERAS care within 3 months after surgery. Patients were enrolled between April 2018 and June 2019 through purposive sampling from 1 hospital in Alberta. The interview transcripts were analyzed independently by a researcher and a trained patient-researcher using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty patients were interviewed. Three main themes were identified. First, waiting for surgery: patients described fear, anxiety, isolation and deterioration of their mental and physical states as they waited passively for surgery. Second, preparing would have been better than just waiting: patients perceived that a prehabilitation program could prepare them for their operation if it addressed their emotional and physical needs, provided personalized support, offered home strategies, involved family and included surgical expectations (both what to expect and what is expected of them). Third, partnering with patients: preoperative preparation should occur on a continuum that meets patients where they are at and in a partnership that respects patients' expertise and desired level of engagement. CONCLUSION: We identified several patient priorities for the preoperative period. Integrating these priorities within ERAS and prehabilitative programs could improve patient satisfaction, experiences and outcomes. Actively engaging patients in their care might alleviate some of the anxiety and fear associated with waiting passively for surgery.

Food Is Medicine: A Qualitative Analysis of Patient and Institutional Barriers to Successful Surgical Nutrition Practices in an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Setting.

BACKGROUND: Close adherence to the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program is associated with improved outcomes. A nutrition-focused qualitative analysis of patient experience and of ERAS implementation across our province was conducted to better understand the barriers to successful adoption of ERAS nutrition elements. METHODS: Enrolled colorectal patients (n = 27) were asked to describe their surgical experience. Narrative interviews (n = 20) and focus groups (n = 7) were transcribed verbatim and analyzed inductively for food and nutrition themes. Qualitative data sources (n = 198 documents) collected throughout our implementation of ERAS were categorized as institutional barriers that impeded the successful adoption of ERAS nutrition practices. RESULTS: We identified patient barriers related to 3 main themes. The first theme, Mistaken nutrition facts & beliefs, describes how information provision was a key barrier to the successful adoption of nutrition elements. Patients held misconceptions and providers tended to provide them with contradictory nutrition messages, ultimately impeding adequate food intake and adherence to ERAS elements. The second theme, White bread is good for the soul?, represents a mismatch between prescribed medical diets and patient priorities. The third theme, Food is medicine, details patient beliefs that food is healing; the perception that nutritious food and dietary support was lacking produced dissatisfaction among patients. Overall, the most important institutional barrier limiting successful adoption of nutrition practices was the lack of education for patients and providers. CONCLUSION: Applying a patient-centered model of care that focuses on personalizing the ERAS nutrition elements might be a useful strategy to improve patient satisfaction, encourage food intake, correct previously held beliefs, and promote care adherence.

A modified Delphi process to identify clinical and research priorities in patient and family centred critical care.

PURPOSE: To identify elements which enable patient and family centred care (PFCC) in the intensive care unit (ICU) and priorities for PFCC research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We engaged a panel of multidisciplinary stakeholders in a modified Delphi process. Items generated from a literature review and panelist suggestions were rated in 3 successive rounds on a scale from 1 to 7. Median score was used to rate each item's priority, with 5 or more indicating "essential priority," 4 or 5 "moderate priority" and 3 or less "low priority." Interquartile range (IQR) was used to measure consensus, with IQR of 1 indicating "high" consensus, 2 "moderate" consensus, and 3 or greater "low" consensus. RESULTS: Six items were rated essential elements for facilitating PFCC with high consensus (flexible visiting hours, family participation in bedside care, trained family support person, interventions to facilitate continuity of care, staff education to support families, continuity of staff assignments). Three items were rated essential research topics: interventions to facilitate continuity of care following ICU discharge (moderate consensus), family participation in bedside care (low consensus), and decision aids for end of life decision-making (low consensus). CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholders identified clear and distinct priorities for PFCC in clinical care and research, though there was greater consensus for clinical care.

Patients as partners in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: A qualitative patient-led study.

OBJECTIVES: Explore the experience of patients undergoing colorectal surgery within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programme. Use these experiential data to inform the development of a framework to support ongoing, meaningful patient engagement in ERAS. DESIGN: Qualitative patient-led study using focus groups and narrative interviews. Data were analysed iteratively using a Participatory Grounded Theory approach. SETTING: Five tertiary care centres in Alberta, Canada, following the ERAS programme. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-seven patients who had undergone colorectal surgery in the last 12 months were recruited through purposive sampling. Seven patients participated in a codesign focus group to set and prioritise the research direction. Narrative interviews were conducted with 20 patients. RESULTS: Patients perceived that an ERAS programme should not be limited to the perioperative period, but should encompass the journey from diagnosis to recovery. Practical recommendations to improve the patient experience across the surgical continuum, and enhance patient engagement within ERAS included: (1) fully explain every protocol, and the purpose of the protocol, both before surgery and while in-hospital, so that patients can become knowledgeable partners in their recovery; (2) extend ERAS guidelines to the presurgery phase, so that patients can be ready emotionally, psychologically and physically for surgery; (3) extend ERAS guidelines to the recovery period at home to avoid stressful situations for patients and families; (4) consider activating a programme where experienced patients can provide peer support; (5) one size does not fit all; personalised adaptations within the standardised pathway are required.Drawing upon these data, and through consultation with ERAS Alberta stakeholders, the ERAS team developed a matrix to guide sustained patient involvement and action throughout the surgical care continuum at three levels: individual, unit and ERAS system. CONCLUSION: This patient-led study generated new insights into the needs of ERAS patients and informed the development of a framework to improve patient experiences and outcomes.

Patient and Family Member-Led Research in the Intensive Care Unit: A Novel Approach to Patient-Centered Research.

INTRODUCTION: Engaging patients and family members as partners in research increases the relevance of study results and enhances patient-centered care; how to best engage patients and families in research is unknown. METHODS: We tested a novel research approach that engages and trains patients and family members as researchers to see if we could understand and describe the experiences of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and their families. Former patients and family members conducted focus groups and interviews with patients (n = 11) and families of surviving (n = 14) and deceased (n = 7) patients from 13 ICUs in Alberta Canada, and analyzed data using conventional content analysis. Separate blinded qualitative researchers conducted an independent analysis. RESULTS: Participants described three phases in the patient/family "ICU journey"; admission to ICU, daily care in ICU, and post-ICU experience. Admission to ICU was characterized by family shock and disorientation with families needing the presence and support of a provider. Participants described five important elements of daily care: honoring the patient's voice, the need to know, decision-making, medical care, and culture in ICU. The post-ICU experience was characterized by the challenges of the transition from ICU to a hospital ward and long-term effects of critical illness. These "ICU journey" experiences were described as integral to appropriate interactions with the care team and comfort and trust in the ICU, which were perceived as essential for a community of caring. Participants provided suggestions for improvement: 1) provide a dedicated family navigator, 2) increase provider awareness of the fragility of family trust, 3) improve provider communication skills, 4) improve the transition from ICU to hospital ward, and 5) inform patients about the long-term effects of critical illness. Analyses by independent qualitative researchers identified similar themes. CONCLUSIONS: Patient and family member-led research is feasible and can identify opportunities for improving care.

The long-term impacts of group treatment for partner abuse.

This paper evaluates Responsible Choices for Men, a 14-week therapy group for abusive men based on feminist perspectives using narrative methods. Pre-test and post-test information was available for 76 program completers measuring physical and non-physical abuse, self-esteem, perceived stress, family relations, depression, assertiveness, and sex-role beliefs. The men significantly improved on all variables. A further focus was following up with 22 group members, contacted 5 to 28 months post treatment and asked to complete the same measures. The results indicated not only maintenance of the post-group changes, but continued improvement. Clinical implications and recommendations for group programming with abusive men are presented.