The effectiveness of prehabilitation on post-operative recovery from lumbar spinal stenosis surgery – A systematic review and intervention component analysis

ObjectiveTo evaluate prehabilitation interventions evaluated in randomised controlled trials for people undergoing lumbar spinal stenosis surgery and determine which individual intervention components are associated with successful interventions.Data sourcesEnglish language papers from 2011 until December 2025 from PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, Scopus and Web of Science.Review methodsWe searched for randomised controlled trials comparing prehabilitation to other non-active interventions for people undergoing surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Two authors independently screened, selected and performed quality assessments of the studies. Relevant study details were extracted, tabulated and synthesised using intervention component analysis.ResultsNine papers describing five randomised control trials involving 466 participants and 28 outcomes measured pre- and/or post-surgery were found. Overall, the interventions consisted of 47 individual components. Fifteen of these components (including psychological/behavioural approaches, and cardiovascular, strength and trunk/core exercise) featured in successful interventions that resulted in greater improvement in 16 outcomes (including back pain, disability, walking and hospital stay) in prehabilitation compared to usual care participants. The results of further evaluation of individual outcomes at each time point was inconsistent and unreliable.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42025645253, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42025645253ConclusionOnly five small trials of low-to-moderate quality report common outcomes at similar timepoints. There is high uncertainty regarding the importance of individual intervention components in successful prehabilitation interventions for people undergoing lumbar spinal stenosis surgery.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical Rehabilitation
Published
2026-03-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155261418206
Primary Topic
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The effectiveness of prehabilitation on post-operative recovery from lumbar spinal stenosis surgery – A systematic review and intervention component analysis

Andrew Booth, Rebecca Hunter, Paul Hendrick, Lianne Wood et al.
Clinical Rehabilitation
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
article

The effectiveness of prehabilitation on post-operative recovery from lumbar spinal stenosis surgery – A systematic review and intervention component analysis

Andrew Booth, Rebecca Hunter, Paul Hendrick, Lianne Wood, BETHAN E. PHILLIPS, E. M. Williamson, O Sahota, Peter Heine, Sarah E Lamb
article en

Abstract

ObjectiveTo evaluate prehabilitation interventions evaluated in randomised controlled trials for people undergoing lumbar spinal stenosis surgery and determine which individual intervention components are associated with successful interventions.Data sourcesEnglish language papers from 2011 until December 2025 from PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, Scopus and Web of Science.Review methodsWe searched for randomised controlled trials comparing prehabilitation to other non-active interventions for people undergoing surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Two authors independently screened, selected and performed quality assessments of the studies. Relevant study details were extracted, tabulated and synthesised using intervention component analysis.ResultsNine papers describing five randomised control trials involving 466 participants and 28 outcomes measured pre- and/or post-surgery were found. Overall, the interventions consisted of 47 individual components. Fifteen of these components (including psychological/behavioural approaches, and cardiovascular, strength and trunk/core exercise) featured in successful interventions that resulted in greater improvement in 16 outcomes (including back pain, disability, walking and hospital stay) in prehabilitation compared to usual care participants. The results of further evaluation of individual outcomes at each time point was inconsistent and unreliable.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42025645253, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42025645253ConclusionOnly five small trials of low-to-moderate quality report common outcomes at similar timepoints. There is high uncertainty regarding the importance of individual intervention components in successful prehabilitation interventions for people undergoing lumbar spinal stenosis surgery.

Clinical Rehabilitation
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust (GB), University of Nottingham (GB), University of Exeter (GB), University of Oxford (GB), University of Sheffield (GB)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.