A prehabilitation programme is feasible and acceptable for mild-to-moderately frail patients undergoing cardiac surgeries

Abstract Background Preoperative frailty is a strong prognostication in cardiac surgical patients to predict poorer health outcomes. Intervening at the preoperative stage through prehabilitation is gaining increasing research attention. Previous studies tested a single frailty-reversing strategy, either nutritional or exercise, the exercise protocols were mainly aerobic-focused, which deviates from the exercise prescription principles suggested for frailty management, rendering an effective prehabilitation intervention is yet to be developed in cardiac surgical patients. Purpose This study aimed to examine the preliminary effects and explore the feasibility of a multi-component frailty-specific prehabilitation programme for mild-to-moderately frail patients undergoing cardiac surgeries/procedures. We hypothesised that compared with patients who receive usual care, patients awaiting cardiac surgeries who participate in the prehabilitation programme would have improved functional capacity, frailty status, quality of life and psychological outcomes, increased serum albumin and reduced C-reactive protein. Methods This study adopted a mixed-method design comprising a pilot randomised controlled trial and a qualitative study. Adult patients with a Clinical Frailty Scale score between 4 and 6, waiting for coronary artery bypass grafting surgery and/or valve repair/replacement, with at least 5 weeks of procedural waiting time and without contraindications for exercise were recruited. They were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive the prehabilitation programme or usual care. The programme comprised a structured preoperative education, nutritional optimization, stress management; and a multi-component exercise training with 3 sessions/week and 60 minutes/session. The exercise training lasted at least 4 weeks and maintained throughout the preoperative period. Results Twenty participants were randomized into the intervention (n = 11) or control (n = 9) group. The programme was feasible, acceptable and no severe adverse events were recorded. The lost to follow-up rate was 7.9%, and the overall attendance was 96%. The intervention group showed significantly greater improvement in functional capacity, frailty status and psychological outcomes than the control group at post-intervention. Participants gave positive comments about the programme and its delivery mode. They expressed that the one-on-one home-based practice enabled them greater confidence to overcome kinesiophobia. Two participants voiced out the preference for exclusive home-based training, rather than having hospital-based training in the first two weeks. Conclusion(s) The prehabilitation programme is feasible and acceptable for patients waiting for cardiac surgeries. It improves the functional performance, frailty status and psychological outcomes in these patients. A full-scale randomised controlled trial is warranted to investigate its longer-term and clinical effects.