Recovery of surgery in the elderly (ROSE) program: The efficacy of a multi-modal prehabilitation program implemented in frail and pre-frail elderly undergoing major abdominal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Major abdominal surgery is associated with a high rate of post-operative complications with increased risk of adverse surgical outcomes due to the presence of frailty. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the multimodal Recovery of Surgery in the Elderly (ROSE) prehabilitation program with supervised exercise in mitigating postoperative functional decline when compared to standard care. METHOD: The ROSE program enrolled ambulant patients who were 65 years and above, had a Clinical Frailty Scale score of 4 or more and were planned for major abdominal surgery. Participation in supervised exercise sessions before surgery were compared with standard physiotherapy advice. The primary outcome was 6-min walk test (6MWT) distance assessed at baseline, after prehabilitation and 30 days follow-up after surgery. Secondary outcomes included physical performance, length of hospital stay and postoperative morbidity. RESULTS: Data from 74 eligible patients, 37 in each group, were included. Median age was 78 years old. Forty-two patients (22 in Prehab group and 20 in control group) with complete 6MWT follow-up data at 30 days follow-up were analysed for outcomes. Most patients underwent laparoscopic surgery (63.5%) and almost all of the surgeries were for abdominal malignancies (97.3%). The Prehab group had an increase in 6MWT distance at the 30-day follow up, from a baseline mean (SD) of 277.4 (125) m to 287.6 (143.5) m (p = 0.415). The 6MWT distance in the control group decreased from a baseline mean (SD) of 281.7 (100.5) m to 260.1 (78.6) m at the 30-day follow up (p = 0.086). After adjusting for baseline 6MWT distance and frailty score, the Prehab group had significantly higher 6MWT distance at 30-day follow-up than control (difference in adjusted means 41.7 m, 95% confidence interval 8.7-74.8 m, p = 0.015). There were no significant between-group differences in the secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: A multimodal prehabilitation program with supervised exercise within a short time frame can improve preoperative functional capacity and maintain baseline functional capacity in frail older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery.

The 2 min step test: A reliable and valid measure of functional capacity in older adults post coronary revascularisation.

PURPOSE: Exercise training is the central component in Cardiac Rehabilitation (CR). A baseline assessment of aerobic capacity is paramount for exercise prescription and safety. The Two-Minute Step Test (2MST) has been used to measure aerobic capacity in healthy older adults. However, the reliability and validity of the 2MST in older adults post-coronary revascularisation (CRV) is unknown. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted in a single CR centre. Two 2MSTs and one six-minute walk test (6MWT) were completed in a single session. The 2MST measurements were recorded by two raters for each individual. The six-minute walk distance (6MWD) and 2MST steps recorded by both raters were analysed to determine the relationship and agreement between measurements. RESULTS: Thirty one participants with a median (IQR) age of 66 (62,73) years old were included in the study post CRV. Strong positive correlations were found between steps achieved during the 2MSTs and the 6MWD (r = 0.87, 95% CI 0.82-0.91, p < 0.0001). Excellent inter-rater reliability was demonstrated between raters during the 2MSTs (ICC = 0.999-1.000, p = 0.000). Excellent relative test-retest reliability was demonstrated in both 2MSTs recorded by both raters (ICC = 0.927-0.934, p = 0.000). However, absolute test-retest reliability may have been limited by a learning effect between repeated 2MSTs. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that the 2MST may be used as an alternative to the 6MWT as an outcome measure for aerobic capacity in older adults post-CRV. However, a practice trial is recommended at baseline to account for a learning effect.

Sustaining a Multidisciplinary, Single-Institution, Postoperative Mobilization Clinical Practice Improvement Program Following Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol has been recently extended to hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgery, with excellent outcomes reported. Early mobilization is an essential facet of the ERAS protocol, but compliance has been reported to be poor. We recently reported our success in a 6-month clinical practice improvement program (CPIP) for early postoperative mobilization. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we experienced reduced staffing and resource availability, which can make CPIP sustainability difficult. OBJECTIVE: We report outcomes at 1 year following the implementation of our CPIP to improve postoperative mobilization in patients undergoing major HPB surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We divided our study into 4 phases-phase 1: before CPIP implementation (January to April 2019); phase 2: CPIP implementation (May to September 2019); phase 3: post-CPIP implementation but prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (October 2019 to March 2020); and phase 4: post-CPIP implementation and during the pandemic (April 2020 to September 2020). Major HPB surgery was defined as any surgery on the liver, pancreas, and biliary system with a duration of >2 hours and with an anticipated blood loss of ≥500 ml. Study variables included length of hospital stay, distance ambulated on postoperative day (POD) 2, morbidity, balance measures (incidence of fall and accidental dislodgement of drains), and reasons for failure to achieve targets. Successful mobilization was defined as the ability to sit out of bed for >6 hours on POD 1 and ambulate ≥30 m on POD 2. The target mobilization rate was ≥75%. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients underwent major HPB surgery from phases 2 to 4 of our study, with 33 (29.0%), 45 (39.5%), and 36 (31.6%) patients in phases 2, 3, and 4, respectively. No baseline patient demographic data were collected for phase 1 (pre-CPIP implementation). The majority of the patients were male (n=79, 69.3%) and underwent hepatic surgery (n=92, 80.7%). A total of 76 (66.7%) patients underwent ON-Q PainBuster insertion intraoperatively. The median mobilization rate was 22% for phase 1, 78% for phases 2 and 3 combined, and 79% for phase 4. The mean pain score was 2.7 (SD 1.0) on POD 1 and 1.8 (SD 1.5) on POD 2. The median length of hospitalization was 6 days (IQR 5-11.8). There were no falls or accidental dislodgement of drains. Six patients (5.3%) had pneumonia, and 21 (18.4%) patients failed to ambulate ≥30 m on POD 2 from phases 2 to 4. The most common reason for failure to achieve the ambulation target was pain (6/21, 28.6%) and lethargy or giddiness (5/21, 23.8%). CONCLUSIONS: This follow-up study demonstrates the sustainability of our CPIP in improving early postoperative mobilization rates following major HPB surgery 1 year after implementation, even during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further large-scale, multi-institutional prospective studies should be conducted to assess compliance and determine its sustainability.

Prehabilitation Program Improves Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Elective Liver Resection.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative phase can be effectively used by multidisciplinary teams to optimize the surgical candidate to improve perioperative outcomes. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of prehabilitation program (PP) in patients undergoing elective liver resection (LR). METHODS: This was a prospective study including patients undergoing elective LR from February 2016 to October 2017. Outcomes of patients enrolled into PP were compared with patients receiving standard care. PP involved physiotherapist, dietitian, and case managers along with surgical and anesthetic services. Postoperative morbidity, length of stay, 90-day mortality, readmission rate, quality of life, and cost were measured. RESULTS: Seventy patients were enrolled into PP and compared with 34 patients receiving standard care. Median Charlson comorbidity index was higher in PP group (4 versus 3, P = 0.03). PP showed reduction in overall morbidity (30% versus 52.9%, P = 0.02) and social issues (nil versus 3, P = 0.03). Quality of life survey showed improved social well-being. A tendency to cost savings was observed in prehabilitation group with 16.5% ($1359) cost reduction (median cost $6892 versus $8251, P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: PP improves outcomes in patients undergoing elective LR.