Prehabilitation programs for individuals with cancer: a systematic review of randomized-controlled trials

Table 5 Summary of findings table for the comparison: respiratory muscle training + aerobic training vs usual care

Prehabilitation programs for individuals with cancer
Population: adults with lung and colorectal cancer Intervention: respiratory muscle training plus aerobic training Comparison: usual care Setting: clinic/hospital
Outcomes	Relative effect (95% CI)	Anticipated absolute effect^a (95% CI)		Nº of participants (studies)	Certainty of the evidence (GRADE)
Outcomes	Relative effect (95% CI)	Assumed risk with control	Assumed risk with intervention	Nº of participants (studies)	Certainty of the evidence (GRADE)
HRQoL (overall) ^b (4 weeks)	MD 1.1 (-1.9 to 4.2)	69 points	Mean HRQoL in intervention was 1 higher (1.9 lower to 4.2 higher)	101 (1 RCT)	⨁◯◯◯ VERY LOW ^d,e
Postoperative complications (4 to 48 weeks)	Not estimable	-	Evidence of no difference between groups	829 (3 RCTs)	⨁◯◯◯ LOW ^d,f
Average length of stay ^c (1 to 12 weeks)	Not estimable	-	Evidence of no difference between groups	728 (2 RCTs)	⨁◯◯◯ VERY LOW ^f,g,h

^aThe risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI Confidence interval, HRQoL Health-related quality of life, MD Mean Difference, RR Risk ratio
^bEORTC QLQ-C30: higher scores indicate better functioning (scaled from 0 to 100)
^cAdministrative data: higher number of days indicate worse outcome
^dDowngraded by two levels due to selection bias, no blinding of personnel (performance bias) and selective outcome reporting
^eDowngraded by two levels due to small sample size and wide confidence intervals (imprecision)
^fDowngraded by one level due to wide confidence intervals (imprecision)
^gDowngraded by one level due to selection bias (allocation concealment)
^hDowngraded by one level due to inconsistency (opposite results)

ISSN: 2046-4053