Protocol for the PREHAB study—Pre-operative Rehabilitation for reduction of Hospitalization After coronary Bypass and valvular surgery: a randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Frailty is a geriatric syndrome characterised by reductions in muscle mass, strength, endurance and activity level. The frailty syndrome, prevalent in 25-50% of patients undergoing cardiac surgery, is associated with increased rates of mortality and major morbidity as well as function decline postoperatively. This trial will compare a preoperative, interdisciplinary exercise and health promotion intervention to current standard of care (StanC) for elective coronary artery bypass and valvular surgery patients for the purpose of determining if the intervention improves 3-month and 12-month clinical outcomes among a population of frail patients waiting for elective cardiac surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, randomised, open end point, controlled trial using assessor blinding and intent-to-treat analysis. Two-hundred and forty-four elective cardiac surgical patients will be recruited and randomised to receive either StanC or StanC plus an 8-week exercise and education intervention at a certified medical fitness facility. Patients will attend two weekly sessions and aerobic exercise will be prescribed at 40-60% of heart rate reserve. Data collection will occur at baseline, 1-2 weeks preoperatively, and at 3 and 12 months postoperatively. The primary outcome of the trial will be the proportion of patients requiring a hospital length of stay greater than 7 days. POTENTIAL IMPACT OF STUDY: The healthcare team is faced with an increasingly complex older adult patient population. As such, this trial aims to provide novel evidence supporting a health intervention to ensure that frail, older adult patients thrive after undergoing cardiac surgery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Trial results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, and presented at national and international scientific meetings. The University of Manitoba Health Research Ethics Board has approved the study protocol V.1.3, dated 11 August 2014 (H2014:208). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The trial has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, a registry and results database of privately and publicly funded clinical studies (NCT02219815).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.086 | 0.015 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".