Prehabilitation for adults diagnosed with cancer: A systematic review of long-term physical function, nutrition and patient-reported outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Prehabilitation is increasingly being used to mitigate treatment-related complications and enhance recovery. An individual's state of health at diagnosis, including obesity, physical fitness and comorbidities, are influencing factors for the occurrence of adverse effects. This review explores whether prehabilitation works in improving health outcomes at or beyond the initial 30 days post-treatment and considers the utility of prehabilitation before cancer treatment. METHODS: A database search was conducted for articles published with prehabilitation as a pre-cancer treatment intervention between 2009 and 2017. Studies with no 30 days post-treatment data were excluded. Outcomes post-prehabilitation were extracted for physical function, nutrition and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Sixteen randomised controlled trials with a combined 2017 participants and six observational studies with 289 participants were included. Prehabilitation interventions provided multi-modality components including exercise, nutrition and psychoeducational aspects. Prehabilitation improved gait, cardiopulmonary function, urinary continence, lung function and mood 30 days post-treatment but was not consistent across studies. CONCLUSION: When combined with rehabilitation, greater benefits were seen in 30-day gait and physical functioning compared to prehabilitation alone. Large-scale randomised studies are required to translate what is already known from feasibility studies to improve overall health and increase long-term cancer patient outcomes.

Human Papillomavirus Immunization in Rural Primary Care.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the safety and efficacy of the human papillomavirus vaccine, thousands are impacted by human papillomavirus and its related cancers. Rural regions have disproportionately low rates of human papillomavirus vaccination. Primary care clinics play an important role in delivering the human papillomavirus vaccine. A positive deviance approach is used to identify workflows, organizational factors, and communication strategies in rural clinics with higher human papillomavirus vaccine up-to-date rates. Positive deviance is a process by which exceptional behaviors and strategies are identified to understand factors that enable success. METHODS: Rural primary care clinics were rank ordered by human papillomavirus vaccine up-to-date rates using 2018 Oregon Immunization Program data, then recruited via purposive sampling of clinics in the top and bottom quartiles. Two study team members conducted previsit interviews, intake surveys, and 2-day observation visits with 12 clinics and prepared detailed field notes. Data were collected October-December 2018 and analyzed using a thematic approach January-April 2019. RESULTS: Four themes distinguished rural clinics with higher human papillomavirus vaccine up-to-date rates from those with lower rates. First, they implemented standardized workflows to identify patients due for the vaccine and had vaccine administration protocols. Second, they designated and supported a vaccine champion. Third, clinical staff in higher performing sites were comfortable providing immunizations regardless of visit type. Finally, they used clear, persuasive language to recommend or educate parents and patients about the vaccine's importance. CONCLUSIONS: Positive deviance identified characteristics associated with higher human papillomavirus vaccine up-to-date rates in rural primary care clinics. These findings provide guidance for rural clinics to inform human papillomavirus vaccination quality improvement interventions.

Patient-centered communication between adolescent and young adult cancer survivors and their healthcare providers: Identifying research gaps with a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a scoping literature review to identify practices or programs that promote AYA patient-centered communication. METHODS: Between January and May of 2016, we applied standard scoping review methodology to systematically review articles. We considered peer-reviewed, English language articles written at any phase of intervention research. Both qualitative and quantitative studies were eligible, and no additional search restrictions were applied. We retained articles that included explicit or implicit outcomes for one of the six functions of patient-centered communication in cancer care. At least two independent reviewers assessed the articles. RESULTS: We screened a total of 4072 titles and abstracts, retaining 27 for full-text review. Ultimately, eight titles met the review's inclusion criteria. We categorized each publication by the action or setting used to improve patient-centered communication, resulting in five categories. Most studies were not included because they did not include a patient-centered communication outcome. CONCLUSION: This area of research is still emerging, as indicated by the small number of eligible studies and predominance of qualitative, descriptive, pilot, and feasibility studies with small sample sizes. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our results suggest a clear need to develop and evaluate interventions focused on improving patient-centered communication between AYA survivors and their healthcare providers.