Back

The effect of prehabilitation on health resource use and one-year survival: The Active Together Service

Rosenthal, K.; Kudiersky, N.; Frith, G.; Phillips, G.; Keen, C.; Howdon, D.; Barratt, S.; Mills, G.; Greenfield, D. M.; Myers, A.; Humphreys, L.; Copeland, R.

2025-09-02 oncology
10.1101/2025.09.01.25334844 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionResearch suggests that multi-modal prehabilitation can improve quality of life and clinical outcomes. There is limited evidence, however, on the effect of prehabilitation on hospital resource use. Materials and MethodsPatients receiving surgery for colorectal, lung or upper gastrointestinal cancer between January 2022 and March 2024, were referred to a multi-modal prehabilitation service (Active Together). Patients who declined to participate in Active Together and historical patient data (2017-2021) were used as comparator groups. Outcome measures were length of hospital stay, length of critical care stay, the total number of days spent in hospital as a readmission in the 90 days following surgery, and one-year survival rate. Results305 patients completed prehabilitation, 96 patients declined to join the service, and 869 patients were included in the historical dataset. Active Together colorectal patients spent less time in critical care than historical colorectal patients (0.9 vs 1.2 days, p = 0.011). Whereas Active Together lung patients spent longer in critical care than historical lung patients (2.5 vs 1.7 days, p < 0.001). One-year survival rate was greater in Active Together patients compared to the declined group (95% vs 85%, p= 0.013), and not significantly different from the historical group (95% vs 92%, p= 0.14). The probability of the prehabilitation being cost saving was 58%, 60%, and 59% for colorectal, lung and upper gastrointestinal patients, respectively. ConclusionPrehabilitation has a limited effect on healthcare resource use and may improve one-year survival. Further research with large sample sizes is required to confirm small differences.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.