Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) ; 28(4): e13023, 2019 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30859650

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Affect , Neoplasms/rehabilitation , Physical Functional Performance , Exercise Therapy , Gait , Humans , Nutrition Therapy , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Physical Fitness , Respiratory Function Tests
2.
Nutr Res Rev ; 30(2): 220-232, 2017 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28606220

ABSTRACT

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is used widely as part of a combined modality for the treatment of prostate cancer. However, ADT has also been associated with the development of cardiometabolic complications that can increase mortality from cardiovascular events. There is emerging evidence to suggest that ADT-related cardiometabolic risk can be mitigated by diet and lifestyle modification. While the clinical focus for a nutritional approach for achieving this effect is unclear, it may depend upon the timely assessment and targeting of dietary changes to the specific risk phenotype of the patient. The present review aims to address the metabolic origins of ADT-related cardiometabolic risk, existing evidence for the effects of dietary intervention in modifying this risk, and the priorities for future dietary strategies.


Subject(s)
Androgens/deficiency , Cardiovascular Diseases/etiology , Metabolic Syndrome/etiology , Nutrition Therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Aged , Androgens/physiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Combined Modality Therapy/adverse effects , Diet , Humans , Intra-Abdominal Fat , Life Style , Male , Metabolic Syndrome/epidemiology , Risk Factors , Sarcopenia , Subcutaneous Fat
3.
Complement Ther Clin Pract ; 18(2): 75-80, 2012 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22500842

ABSTRACT

This study assessed access to Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) therapies for people with cancer within the British National Health Service. CAM units were identified through an internet search in 2009. A total of 142 units, providing 62 different therapies, were identified: 105 (74.0%) England; 23 (16.2%) Scotland; 7 (4.9%) each in Wales and Northern Ireland. Most units provide a small number of therapies (median 4, range 1-20), and focus on complementary, rather than alternative approaches. Counselling is the most widely provided therapy (available at 82.4% of identified units), followed by reflexology (62.0%), aromatherapy (59.1%), reiki (43.0%), massage (42.2%). CAM units per million of the population varied between countries (England: 2.2; Wales: 2.3; Scotland: 4.8; Northern Ireland: 5.0), and within countries. Better publicity for CAM units, greater integration of units in conventional cancer treatment centres may help improve access to CAMs.


Subject(s)
Complementary Therapies/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Neoplasms/therapy , Complementary Therapies/methods , Delivery of Health Care/methods , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Internet , Pilot Projects , State Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom
4.
Complement Ther Med ; 17(2): 84-91, 2009 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19185266

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the proportion of cancer outpatients who visit a Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) unit that is located within a conventional cancer treatment centre; to compare the characteristics of CAM unit visitors with those of all outpatients; to monitor the demand for 20 CAM therapies delivered by professionals, and the use of the CAM unit for waiting, gathering information and informal support from volunteer staff. DESIGN: Prospective, observational, over a six month period. SETTING: CAM unit within a NHS cancer treatment centre. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Utilisation of the CAM unit for 20 complementary therapies, and for waiting, gathering information, informal support; characteristics of CAM users compared with those of all cancer outpatients attending the cancer centre; predictors of CAM therapy use and frequent use. RESULTS: 761 (95% of those approached) people were recruited, 498 (65.4%) cancer patients, 202 (26.5%) relatives, 37 (4.8%) friends/carers, 24 (3.2%) staff. Women predominated (n=560, 73.6%). Of all outpatients attending the cancer centre, 498 (15.8%) visited the CAM unit, 290 (9.2%) accessed therapies. Compared to all outpatients, those visiting the CAM unit were: younger (mean 63.7 vs. 58.4 years), more likely to be female (57.9% vs. 78.7%), have breast (14.8% vs. 51.9%), gynaecological (5.0% vs. 9.1%) cancer, live in local postal district (57.3% vs. 61.6%). Significant predictors of therapy use and frequent visits were being a patient, female, higher education, living closer to the cancer centre. CONCLUSIONS: Despite easy access to CAM therapies, a relatively small number of people regularly used them, whilst a larger number selectively tried a few. The integrated CAM unit meets a demand for information and informal support. The findings inform emerging policy on integrating CAM and conventional cancer treatment to address psychosocial needs of people with cancer. More research is needed on why people do not use integrated CAM services and how charges affect demand.


Subject(s)
Complementary Therapies/statistics & numerical data , Neoplasms , Outpatient Clinics, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Age Factors , Female , Health Services Accessibility , Hospital Units/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Outpatient Clinics, Hospital/organization & administration , Patient Care Management , Prospective Studies , Sex Factors , Socioeconomic Factors , United Kingdom
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL