Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Apr 21;23(1):333.
doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06272-2.

STRONG for Surgery & Strong for Life - against all odds: intensive prehabilitation including smoking, nutrition, alcohol and physical activity for risk reduction in cancer surgery - a protocol for an RCT with nested interview study (STRONG-Cancer)

Hanne Tønnesen  1 , Line Noes Lydom  2 , Ulla Nordström Joensen  3 , Ingrid Egerod  4 , Helle Pappot  5 , Susanne Vahr Lauridsen  2   3
Affiliations

STRONG for Surgery & Strong for Life - against all odds: intensive prehabilitation including smoking, nutrition, alcohol and physical activity for risk reduction in cancer surgery - a protocol for an RCT with nested interview study (STRONG-Cancer)

Hanne Tønnesen et al. Trials. .

Abstract

Background: There is a large unused potential for risk reduction in the preoperative period via effective lifestyle intervention targeting co-existing risky lifestyles: Smoking, malNutrition, obesity, risky Alcohol intake and insufficient Physical activity (SNAP). This trial compares the efficacy of the integrated STRONG programme with standard care on preoperative risk reduction and secondly on SNAP factor improvement and frailty, postoperative complications and quality of life. A nested interview study explores the patient preferences and the multi-perspective view of patients, relatives and health professionals.

Methods: In total, 42 surgical patients with ≥1 SNAP factor are allocated to individually tailored STRONG programme or usual care during adjuvant chemotherapy prior to radical bladder cancer surgery. The STRONG programme has ≥6 weekly sessions with patient education, motivational and pharmaceutical support. It is based on intensive smoking and alcohol cessation interventions reporting perioperative quit rates > 50%. Surgical risk reduction is measured as ≥1 step for 1 or more risky lifestyles on the ASA-score, secondly as having no risky SNAP factors, and as any SNAP improvement. The outcomes are validated by measurements and biomarkers. Postoperative complications are categorised according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Health-related quality of life is measured by EQ-5D. The patients are followed up after 6 weeks at surgery and 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. A representative sample of the participants, their relatives and the clinical staff are interviewed until data saturation. Transcription, triangulated analyses and data management are conducted using NVivo computer software.

Discussion: The surgical agenda is characterised by fixed dates for surgery focusing on clear risk reduction within a short time. This requires a clinical useful lifestyle intervention programme with a high effect and coverage as well as containing all SNAP factors and tailored to individual needs. The STRONG programme seems to meet these requirements. After development in multi-professional collaboration, STRONG is delivered by a specially trained nurse as part of the surgical patient journey. Overall, this study will bring important new knowledge about risk reduction in a frail patient group undergoing major cancer surgery.

Trial registration: Registration at www.clintrials.gov ( NCT04088968 ) The manuscript form from https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/bmc/journal and the SPIRIT guidelines are followed.

Keywords: Alcohol drinking; Bladder cancer; Malnutrition; Obesity; Overweight; Perioperative risk reduction; Physical activity; Prehabilitation; Radical cystectomy; Smoking.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Potential of preoperative improvement by intensive SNAP prehabilitation
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Trial profile
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Roupret M, Babjuk M, Comperat E, Zigeuner R, Sylvester RJ, Burger M, et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: 2017 update. Eur Urol. 2018;73(1):111–122. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.07.036. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Alfred Witjes J, Lebret T, Compérat EM, Cowan NC, De Santis M, Bruins HM, et al. Updated 2016 EAU guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer. Eur Urol. 2017;71(3):462–475. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.020. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Daniels SL, Lee MJ, George J, Kerr K, Moug S, Wilson TR, et al. Prehabilitation in elective abdominal cancer surgery in older patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. BJS Open. 2020;4(6):1022–1041. doi: 10.1002/bjs5.50347. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rothenberg KA, Stern JR, George EL, Trickey AW, Morris AM, Hall DE, et al. Association of frailty and postoperative complications with unplanned readmissions after elective outpatient surgery. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(5):e194330. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.4330. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jensen BT, Lauridsen SV, Jensen JB. Prehabilitation for major abdominal urologic oncology surgery. Curr Opin Urol. 2018;28(3):243–250. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000487. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data