Parke, Sara C.

Objectives To comprehensively review the available literature on prehabilitation and rehabilitation exercise, nutrition, and psychological support interventions for patients with kidney cancer (KC), to summarise the clinically relevant efficacy and cost‐effectiveness of interventions, to expose key knowledge gaps, and to inform future investigations and initiatives. Methods This review was performed according to the per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews Guidelines. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing programmes of prehabilitation or rehabilitation, exercise, psychological support, or nutrition components in patients with KC or KC caregivers from January 2004 to March 2022. Statistically significant positive (SS+) and negative (SS−) results were summarised. Results The systematic search yielded 10 968 records including 18 RCTs, involving 2774 unique subjects, 706 of whom were KC patients/survivors. None included caregivers or assessed cost‐effectiveness. Two interventions were implemented before surgery, one was implemented prior to initiation of systemic therapy, eight were implemented during systemic or radiation therapy, three were implemented after treatment, while implementation time was not specified for four interventions. Conclusion Most (14/18) RCTs involving exercise, nutrition, psychological support, or prehabilitative or rehabilitative programmes for KC performed to date demonstrated SS+ results. The evidence was most robust regarding previously evaluated psychological support, especially mindfulness‐based interventions (9/10 studies demonstrating SS+ improvement in primary outcomes), followed by therapeutically valid exercise with/without psychological support (5/8 RCTs demonstrated efficacy), then nutrition or pharmacological interventions (2/5 demonstrated efficacy). Level 1 evidence supports counselling patients and referral to mindfulness‐based psychological therapy along with physical therapy or physical medicine and rehabilitation, as well as consideration of preoperative carbohydrate drinks. No studies have examined impact on caregivers, or cost‐effectiveness, which are both critical areas for future study.

Background and Objective Rehabilitation therapy plays an important role in treating physical and functional impairments observed in individuals undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCT). This study assessed the rehabilitation practices implemented in the HSCT population internationally. Materials and Methods A 48-question online survey comprising questions soliciting information regarding patient characteristics, therapy details (timing, indication, and administering providers), outcome measures, and precautions were developed by an international group of cancer rehabilitation physicians. As reported by European registries, surveys were administered to personnel providing care to patients receiving HSCT at cancer centers, which comprised the top 10% of HSCT volume. In addition, emails were sent to National Medical Societies and registries in the Latin America, Asia, and Pacific regions. Results Forty-three institutions from 18 countries responded to the survey. Half of the centers provided referrals for rehabilitation therapy at the time of admission. Referrals were provided for functional decline (84.5%), risk of falls (53.3%), and discharge planning (42.2%). Rehabilitation therapies were administered by physical therapists (93.0%), occupational therapists (34.9%), therapy aides (14.0%), and speech-language pathologists (11.6%). Approximately 95% of the surveyed centers used objective functional measures such as sit-to-stand (46.5%), grip strength (46.5%), and 6-min walk/gait speed (both 34.9%). The blood counts were monitored to determine the appropriateness of the therapy modalities. Conclusion Rehabilitation practices varied internationally; however, most centers provided skilled therapy during hospitalization for HSCT, utilized objective and patient-reported outcomes, and monitored blood counts to determine the safety of administering therapy.

Abstract The study of prehabilitation and rehabilitation ([p]rehabilitation) to alleviate the sequelae of bladder cancer and its treatment has generated numerous opportunities to improve the quality of life of bladder cancer survivors. The authors conducted a scoping review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to identify knowledge gaps in and research directions for (p)rehabilitative support for those affected by bladder cancer. The authors systematically searched six databases and synthesized key findings from RCTs conducted from January 1, 2004, through March 15, 2022, that enrolled participants with bladder cancer, survivors, or caregivers in outpatient (p)rehabilitative programs (e.g., exercise, nutrition, or psychological support). Outcomes were characterized according to eight prespecified, clinically relevant categories. The search retrieved 10,968 records, 27 of which met the inclusion criteria, and 24 described unique RCTs with 2471 enrolled participants. Of 24 interventions, 17 (71%) yielded statistically significant results for the outcome of interest. Only one RCT included a cost‐effectiveness analysis, and only two characterized the efficacy of interventions for caregivers. Of 11 RCTs involving psychological support, eight yielded statistically significant results, as did nine of 11 RCTs with physical exercise interventions, three of four RCTs with educational interventions, three of four RCTs with nutritional support interventions, one of two RCTs with pharmacologic medications, and zero of one RCT with physical therapy. The most promising interventions for inclusion in multimodal, personalized (p)rehabilitation programs included exercise, stress management training, cognitive training, smoking and alcohol cessation counseling, immunonutrition, stoma education, and penile rehabilitation. Further studies of the cost effectiveness and efficacy for caregivers of such interventions are needed. Plain Language Summary In a scoping review of all randomized clinical trials involving prehabilitative or rehabilitative diet, exercise, and psychological support interventions for patients with bladder cancer, survivors, and their caregivers, 17 of 24 (71%) interventions yielded statistically significant improvements in the outcome of interest. Clinicians should consider implementing such interventions for those affected by bladder cancer.

Background: Rehabilitation therapy is important to treat physical and functional impairments that may occur in individuals receiving physically taxing, yet potentially curative hematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCTs). However, there are scarce data on how rehabilitation is delivered during HSCT in real-life setting. Our objective is to assess the rehabilitation practices for adult patients hospitalized for HSCT in the United States. Methods: We conducted a 48-question online survey with cancer centers with the top 10% HSCT volumes (per American registries). We obtained data on patient characteristics, rehabilitation therapy details (timing, indication, and administering providers), physical function objective and subjective outcome measures, and therapy activity precautions. Results: Out of 21 institutions, 14 were included. Rehabilitation therapy referrals occurred at admission for all patients at 35.7% of the centers for: functional decline (92.9%), fall risk (71.4%), and discharge planning (71.4%). Participating institutions had physical therapists (92.9%), occupational therapists (85.7%), speech-language pathologists (64.3%), and therapy aides (35.7%) in their rehabilitation team. Approximately 71% of centers used objective functional measures including sit-to-stand tests (50.0%), balance measures (42.9%), and 6-minute walk/gait speed (both 35.7%). Monitoring of blood counts to determine therapy modalities frequently occurred and therapies held for low platelet or hemoglobin values, but absolute neutrophil values were not a barrier to participate in resistance or aerobic therapies (42.9%). Conclusion: Rehabilitation practices during HSCT varied among the largest volume cancer centers in the United States, but most centers provided skilled therapy, utilized objective, clinician- and patient-reported outcomes, and monitored blood counts for safety of therapy administration.

ImportanceHead and neck cancer–associated lymphedema (HNCaL) affects up to 90% of survivors of head and neck cancer and is a substantial contributor to disability following head and neck cancer treatment. Despite the prevalence and morbidity associated with HNCaL, rehabilitation interventions are not well studied.ObjectiveTo identify and appraise the current evidence for rehabilitation interventions in HNCaL.Evidence ReviewFive electronic databases were searched systematically from inception to January 3, 2023, for studies on HNCaL rehabilitation interventions. Study screening, data extraction, quality rating, and risk of bias assessment were performed by 2 independent reviewers.FindingsOf 1642 citations identified, 23 studies (1.4%; n = 2147 patients) were eligible for inclusion. Six studies (26.1%) were randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 17 (73.9%) were observational studies. Five of the 6 RCTs were published during 2020 to 2022. Most studies had fewer than 50 participants (5 of 6 RCTs; 13 of 17 observational studies). Studies were categorized by intervention type, including standard lymphedema therapy (11 studies [47.8%]) and adjunct therapy (12 studies [52.2%]). Lymphedema therapy interventions included standard complete decongestive therapy (CDT) (2 RCTs, 5 observational studies), modified CDT (3 observational studies), therapy setting (1 RCT, 2 observational studies), adherence (2 observational studies), early manual lymphatic drainage (1 RCT), and inclusion of focused exercise (1 RCT). Adjunct therapy interventions included advanced pneumatic compression devices (APCDs) (1 RCT, 5 observational studies), kinesio taping (1 RCT), photobiomodulation (1 observational study), acupuncture/moxibustion (1 observational study), and sodium selenite (1 RCT, 2 observational studies). Serious adverse events were either not found (9 [39.1%]) or not reported (14 [60.9%]). Low-quality evidence suggested the benefit of standard lymphedema therapy, particularly in the outpatient setting and with at least partial adherence. High-quality evidence was found for adjunct therapy with kinesio taping. Low-quality evidence also suggested that APCDs may be beneficial.Conclusions and RelevanceThe results of this systematic review suggest that rehabilitation interventions for HNCaL, including standard lymphedema therapy with kinesio taping and APCDs, appear to be safe and beneficial. However, more prospective, controlled, and adequately powered studies are needed to clarify the ideal type, timing, duration, and intensity of lymphedema therapy components before treatment guidelines can be established.

AbstractBackgroundImproved function is associated with reduced morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Cancer rehabilitation medicine (CRM) is a subspecialty of physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) that focuses on improving function in patients with cancer. One of the barriers to patients accessing CRM services is the lack of referrals from oncology providers. Understanding the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of oncology trainees regarding the importance of function and the role of CRM is essential to reducing educational gaps and improving patients' access to essential rehabilitation services.ObjectiveTo determine oncology trainees' knowledge, attitude and beliefs about the importance of function and the role of CRM in the care of patients with cancer.SettingThe study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center in the United States.InterventionDescriptive survey study was administered to postgraduate oncology trainees who spent at least 1 day a week providing patient care.Main outcomeParticipants' report of their knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs on the importance of function and CRM in the care of patients with cancer.ResultsThe survey was sent to 197 oncology trainees with a response rate of 67% (n = 132) and 126 were ultimately included. All participants believed that function is important in the care of patients with cancer. The majority believed that better function improves treatment tolerance (94%) and survival (84%). Most reported that having CRM physicians (80%) and an inpatient rehabilitation unit (88%) in the oncological setting is important; however, most participants reported that they refer fewer than 25% of their patients to CRM services. Participants with prior exposure to PM&R were significantly more likely to consult PM&R compared to those without exposure (p = .005). Most oncology trainees (81%) believed that education in CRM should be part of their oncology training.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that oncology trainees believe that function is important. They also believe that access to CRM would improve treatment tolerance and survival, but most report that they rarely refer patients to CRM services. Most trainees desire increased exposure to CRM during oncology training.

AbstractIn 2018, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) reconvened an international, multi‐disciplinary group of professionals to review pertinent published literature on exercise for people with cancer. The 2018 roundtable resulted in the publication of three articles in 2019. The three articles serve as an important update to the original ACSM Roundtable on Cancer, which convened in 2010. Although the focus of the three 2019 articles is on exercise, which is only one part of comprehensive cancer rehabilitation, the evidence presented in the 2019 ACSM articles has direct implications for physiatrists and other rehabilitation professionals who care for people with cancer. As such, the narrative review presented here has two primary objectives. First, we summarize the evidence within the three ACSM articles and interpret it within a familiar rehabilitation framework, namely the Dietz model of Cancer Rehabilitation, in order to facilitate implementation broadly within rehabilitation practice. Second, via expert consensus, we have tabulated relevant exercise recommendations for specific cancer populations at different points in the cancer care continuum and translated them into text, tables, and figures for ease of reference. Notably, the authors of this article are members of the Cancer Rehabilitation Physician Consortium (CRPC), a group of physicians who subspecialize in cancer rehabilitation medicine (CRM).