Technology-Enabled (P)rehabilitation for Patients Undergoing Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Read full text
Authors: T H Tsoukalas, Zirong Bai, Claire Jeon, Roy Huynh, Eva Gu, Kate Alexander, Paula R. Beckenkamp, Adrian Boscolo, Kilian Brown, P. Butow, Sharon Carey, Fang Chen
+31 more Meredith Cummins, Haryana M. Dhillon, Vesna Dragoje, Kailey Gorman, Matthew Halpin, Abby Haynes, Ilona Juraskova, Sascha Karunaratne, Jamie Keck, Bora Kim, Cherry Koh, Qiang Li, Lara Lipton, Xiaoqiu Liu, Jaime Macedo, Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber, Renée Moreton, Rachael L. Morton, Julie Redfern, Bernhard Riedel, Angus Ritchie, Charbel Sandroussi, Cathy Slattery, Allan Ben Smith, Michael Solomon, Flora Tao, Kate White, Kate Wilson, Kahlia Wolsley, Kun Yu, Daniel Steffens
Cited by: 2
References: 45

Abstract

Background/Objectives: (P)rehabilitation, comprising structured exercise, nutritional optimisation, and/or psychological support delivered pre- or postoperatively, has demonstrated efficacy in improving outcomes across the cancer care continuum. However, access remains limited. Technology-enabled (p)rehabilitation offers a novel solution with the potential to enhance equity and continuity of care. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of technology-enabled (p)rehabilitation on perioperative and patient-reported outcomes among individuals undergoing thoracic and/or abdominopelvic cancer surgery. Methods: Six databases were search from inception to October 2024. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing technology-enabled (p)rehabilitation with usual care, placebo, or non-technology-based interventions in adults undergoing thoracic and/or abdominopelvic cancer surgery. Outcomes included postoperative complications, hospital readmissions, hospital length of stay (LOS), quality of life (QoL), pain, anxiety, depression, fatigue, distress, and satisfaction. Higher scores indicated improved QoL or worse symptom severity. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane tool, and evidence strength was determined using GRADE methodology. Relative risks (RR) and mean differences (MD) were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. Results: Seventeen RCTs (18 publications, n = 1690) were included. Trials most commonly evaluated application-based platforms (n = 8) and the majority exhibited some risk of bias. Technology-enabled (p)rehabilitation was associated with a significant reduction in LOS (MD = 1.33 days; 95% CI: 0.59–2.07; seven trials), and improvements in pain (MD = 6.12; 95% CI: 3.40–8.84; four trials), depression (MD = 2.82; 95% CI: 0.65–4.99; five trials), fatigue (MD = 10.10; 95% CI: 6.97–13.23; three trials) and distress (MD = 1.23; 95% CI: 0.30–2.16; single trial) compared with controls. Conclusions: Technology-enabled (p)rehabilitation shows promise in reducing LOS and improving selected patient-reported outcomes following thoracic and abdominopelvic cancer surgery. Although evidence is limited due to the small number of studies, modest sample sizes, methodological heterogeneity, and intervention variability, the overall findings justify further investigation. Large-scale, adequately powered clinical trials are required to confirm efficacy and guide clinical effectiveness and implementation studies.

Fields of Study & Subjects

Cancer survivorship and care Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Frailty in Older Adults

Publication details

Journal / source
Cancers
Publisher
MDPI AG
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
296–296
Publication date
18 January 2026
Language
EN