Systematic review of preoperative physical activity and its impact on postcardiac surgical outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to study the impact of preoperative physical activity levels on adult cardiac surgical patients' postoperative: (1) major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), (2) adverse events within 30 days, (3) hospital length of stay (HLOS), (4) intensive care unit length of stay (ICU LOS), (5) activities of daily living (ADLs), (6) quality of life, (7) cardiac rehabilitation attendance and (8) physical activity behaviour. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, AgeLine and Cochrane library for cohort studies was conducted. RESULTS: Eleven studies (n=5733 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Only self-reported physical activity tools were used. Few studies used multivariate analyses to compare active versus inactive patients prior to surgery. When comparing patients who were active versus inactive preoperatively, there were mixed findings for MACCE, 30 day adverse events, HLOS and ICU LOS. Of the studies that adjusted for confounding variables, five studies found a protective, independent association between physical activity and MACCE (n=1), 30-day postoperative events (n=2), HLOS (n=1) and ICU LOS (n=1), but two studies found no protective association for 30-day postoperative events (n=1) and postoperative ADLs (n=1). No studies investigated if activity status before surgery impacted quality of life or cardiac rehabilitation attendance postoperatively. Three studies found that active patients prior to surgery were more likely to be inactive postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Due to the mixed findings, the literature does not presently support that self-reported preoperative physical activity behaviour is associated with postoperative cardiac surgical outcomes. Future studies should objectively measure physical activity, clearly define outcomes and adjust for clinically relevant variables. REGISTRATION: Trial registration number NCT02219815. PROSPERO number CRD42015023606.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".