ReviewBMJ medicine2026
Prehabilitation in preparation for surgery.
Review in BMJ medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prehabilitation transforms the preoperative waiting period into an opportunity for patients to actively improve their health before surgery. With surgical populations ageing and presenting with increasing frailty, patient prioritised outcomes, such as postoperative complications and disability, affect >20% of patients undergoing major surgery, resulting in substantial healthcare costs. This review combines the current evidence for prehabilitation components, including exercise, and respiratory, nutritional, cognitive, and psychosocial interventions. Although respiratory prehabilitation showed high certainty evidence for reducing postoperative pulmonary complications after major surgery, other components showed promising but lower certainty benefits. Multimodal prehabilitation, especially when exercise and nutrition are combined, seems to be most effective for improving clinical and patient centred outcomes. Significant knowledge gaps remain, however, about optimal programme design, delivery models, target populations, and strategies to maximise adherence. Patient perspectives emphasise the importance of individualised coaching or support from healthcare professionals, or both, home based accessibility, and collaborative care. Future research should include a focus on pragmatic multicentre trials with robust cost effectiveness analyses to support implementation in the health system of effective, scalable prehabilitation programmes that can meaningfully improve outcomes for surgical patients. Opportunities to enhance the effectiveness and reach of prehabilitation include exploiting existing and emerging technologies, as well as optimising participant support to maximise adherence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.