To Örebro University

oru.seÖrebro University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Patients' perspectives of prehabilitation as an extension of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols
University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Show others and affiliations
2021 (English)In: Canadian journal of surgery, ISSN 0008-428X, E-ISSN 1488-2310, Vol. 64, no 6, p. E578-E587Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) and prehabilitation programs are evidence-based and patient-focused, yet meaningful patient input could further enhance these interventions to produce superior patient outcomes and patient experiences. We conducted a qualitative study with patients who had undergone colorectal surgery under ERAS care to determine how they prepared for surgery, their views on prehabilitation and how prehabilitation could be delivered to best meet patient needs.

METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with adult patients who had undergone colorectal surgery under ERAS care within 3 months after surgery. Patients were enrolled between April 2018 and June 2019 through purposive sampling from 1 hospital in Alberta. The interview transcripts were analyzed independently by a researcher and a trained patient-researcher using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS: Twenty patients were interviewed. Three main themes were identified. First, waiting for surgery: patients described fear, anxiety, isolation and deterioration of their mental and physical states as they waited passively for surgery. Second, preparing would have been better than just waiting: patients perceived that a prehabilitation program could prepare them for their operation if it addressed their emotional and physical needs, provided personalized support, offered home strategies, involved family and included surgical expectations (both what to expect and what is expected of them). Third, partnering with patients: preoperative preparation should occur on a continuum that meets patients where they are at and in a partnership that respects patients' expertise and desired level of engagement.

CONCLUSION: We identified several patient priorities for the preoperative period. Integrating these priorities within ERAS and prehabilitative programs could improve patient satisfaction, experiences and outcomes. Actively engaging patients in their care might alleviate some of the anxiety and fear associated with waiting passively for surgery.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Canadian Medical Association , 2021. Vol. 64, no 6, p. E578-E587
National Category
Surgery
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-95316DOI: 10.1503/cjs.014420ISI: 000714184200001PubMedID: 34728523OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-95316DiVA, id: diva2:1608699
Note

Funding agencies:

Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) PEG-151772  

Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship

Available from: 2021-11-04 Created: 2021-11-04 Last updated: 2021-11-22Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records

Ljungqvist, Olle

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ljungqvist, Olle
By organisation
School of Medical Sciences
In the same journal
Canadian journal of surgery
Surgery

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 24 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf