Table 2.
The global design of prehabilitation programmes for patients with colorectal cancer
| Hospitals that provide prehabilitation (n = 46) | Hospitals that are interested in the implementation of prehabilitation (n = 20) | |
|---|---|---|
| N (%) | N (%) | |
| Do you/would you triage patients before start of a prehabilitation programme? | ||
| Yes | 37 (80.4%) | 18 (90.0%) |
| No | 9 (19.6%) | 2 (10.0%) |
| What (sub-)groups (would) qualify for prehabilitation?a | ||
| All patients with CRC | 8 (17.4%) | 7 (35.0%) |
| Frail patients with CRC | 33 (71.7%) | 13 (65.0%) |
| Elder patients with CRC | 19 (41.3%) | 9 (45.0%) |
| High-risk patients with CRC | 26 (56.5%) | 11 (55.0%) |
| Patients with diseases other than CRC | 9 (19.6%) | 8 (40.0%) |
| What domains are/would be included in the hospital’s prehabilitation programme for CRC?b | ||
| Nutritional status | 45 (97.8%) | 20 (100%) |
| Frailty | 39 (84.8%) | 16 (80.0%) |
| Physical status | 39 (84.8%) | 18 (90.0%) |
| Mental status | 22 (47.8%) | 15 (75.0%) |
| Intoxications | 27 (58.7%) | 15 (75.0%) |
| Anaemia | 38 (82.6%) | 20 (100%) |
| Polypharmacy | 19 (41.3%) | 14 (70.0%) |
| Other | 1 (2.2%) | 1 (5.0%) |
| What is/would be the design of the interventions?a | ||
| Advices for home | 28 (60.9%) | 9 (45.0%) |
| A structured, standardised programme equal for all patients | 6 (13.0%) | 0 (0.0%) |
| A structured, individualised tailored programme | 34 (73.9%) | 20 (100%) |
| Other | 11 (23.9%) | 0 (0.0%) |
| In what setting is/would the programme being/be offered?a | ||
| Hospital based | 24 (52.2%) | 6 (30.0%) |
| In primary care facilities | 39 (84.8%) | 19 (95.0%) |
| In the gym | 14 (30.4%) | 6 (30.0%) |
| Home based | 32 (69.6%) | 16 (80.0%) |
Abbreviations: CRC, colorectal cancer; N, number of respondents
aThree hospitals not included. Two respondents were not intending to implement prehabilitation within the near future and one is missing
bCheck box questions; more than one answer allowed