Prehabilitation before cancer surgery in the UK National Health Service: what services exist, and how do they address health inequalities?
Stewart, H.; Zhang, X.; Hirst, Y.; Wareing, L.; Ashmore, L.; Gaffney, C.; Hadley, C.; Kulikowski, C.; Rycroft-Malone, J.; Shelton, C.; Smith, A.; PARITY Study Collaborators,
Show abstract
ObjectivesTo identify and map prehabilitation services for patients preparing for cancer surgery in the UK National Health Service (NHS) and understand how issues of accessibility and inequality are being addressed. DesignA survey based on the Template for Intervention Description and Replication and criteria for high-quality, equitable prehabilitation developed as part of our broader study. SettingNational Health Service organisations in the UK ParticipantsRepresentatives of prehabilitation services, who were mainly healthcare professionals. To be eligible for inclusion, services had to be part of the funded usual care pathway for patients in the NHS Trust or Health Board and offered, referred to, or signposted by the NHS cancer care team OutcomesThe primary outcome was the availability of a prehabilitation service to patients who were preparing for cancer surgery at a given NHS organisation. Where services existed, we collected data on service characteristics, the size and workload of the service, screening and individualised assessment for prehabilitation, interventions, addressing inequalities, and evaluation of the service. ResultsOf 130 NHS organisations which provided cancer surgery services, we received a response from 112 (86%). Of these, 73 (65%) stated that they had an eligible prehabilitation service, and 39 (35%) stated that they did not. We received detailed survey responses from 51/73 services (70%). These demonstrated variability across all survey domains. Most services involved physiotherapists (43; 84%) and dietitians (37; 73%), with a variety of other professions represented. Twenty-four services (47%) reported that they tailor initial assessments to account for patient characteristics, and most services reported that they take steps to address inequities of access, the most common being support for people who have barriers to accessing the internet (46; 90%). Only 19 services (37%) were in receipt of permanent funding. ConclusionsPrehabilitation provision for people preparing for cancer surgery varies widely across the UK, and this creates inequities in services. Nevertheless, prehabilitation services appear to be aware of the risk of unequal access, and are taking steps to address this. There is an opportunity to address inequalities as services are commissioned, developed and implemented. Strengths and Limitations of this StudyO_LIThis is the most comprehensive survey to date of prehabilitation services available to patients preparing for cancer surgery in the UK. C_LIO_LILocal collaborators helped us to identify services (or gaps in services) in 112 of 130 eligible organisations. C_LIO_LINevertheless, the localised and small-scale nature of prehabilitation services and inconsistent service naming conventions means we are likely to have missed some services. C_LIO_LIWe identified important variability in service design, funding, and how services address health inequalities. C_LIO_LIWhile variations are identified, the methodology of survey-based research means that explanations for this variation remain speculative. C_LI
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Support and follow-up needs of patients discharged from Intensive Care after severe COVID-19: a mixed-methods study of the views of UK general practitioners and intensive care staff during the pandemic’s first wave 94%
- Challenges and facilitators in pathways to cancer diagnosis in Southern Africa: A qualitative study 93%
- Adverse event reviews in healthcare: What matters to patients and their family? A qualitative study exploring the perspective of patients and family 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- From many voices, one question: Community co-design of a population-based qualitative cancer research study 95%
- Mapping rehabilitation pathways after cardiac surgery: Identifying key points for patient involvement and gaps in care 94%
- Wellbeing Impact Study of High-Speed 2 (WISH2): Protocol for a mixed-methods examination of the impact of major transport infrastructure development on mental health and wellbeing 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- “I don’t know what to do or where to go”. Experiences of accessing healthcare support from the perspectives of people living with Long Covid and healthcare professionals: A qualitative study in Bradford, UK 94%
- Patients’ and carers’ experiences of, and engagement with remote home monitoring services for COVID-19 patients: a rapid mixed-methods study 93%
- Challenges of visibility and inclusion in Long COVID: a population-based interview study 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Caregivers’ burden of care during emergency department care transitions among older adults: a mixed methods cohort study 92%
- Care homes, their communities, and resilience in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic: interim findings from a qualitative study 91%
- Maximising pain services for frail older adults, the views of healthcare professionals and commissioners: findings from the Pain in Older People with Frailty (POPPY) study. 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Why is implementing remote monitoring in virtual wards (Hospital at Home) for people living with frailty so hard? Qualitative interview study 93%
- Preventable deaths involving falls in England and Wales, 2013-2022: a systematic case series of coroners’ reports 90%
- The facilitators and barriers to improving functional activity and wellbeing in people with dementia: A qualitative study from the Process Evaluation of Promoting Activity, Independence and Stability in Early Dementia 90%
"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.