Prehabilitation of frail elderly PAtients undergoing majoR surgEry at HOME (PREPARE-HOME): a superiority parallel-group randomised controlled trial protocol evaluating smart wearable enhanced prehabilitation versus usual care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Frailty is a key predictor of adverse surgical outcomes in older adults, contributing to increased postoperative complications, prolonged hospitalisation and delayed recovery. Prehabilitation-targeting improvements in physical function before surgery-can mitigate these risks. However, traditional programmes often face low adherence due to logistical barriers. Integrating smart wearable devices into tele-supervised, home-based prehabilitation may enhance adherence, engagement and clinical outcomes.This trial protocol describes the PREhabilitation of frail elderly PAtients undergoing majoR surgEry at HOME study with the objective to evaluate the effectiveness of a wearable-enhanced, tele-supervised prehabilitation programme (swSEP) versus standard care (unsupervised prehabilitation, uSEP) on improving preoperative functional capacity and postoperative outcomes in frail older adults undergoing major elective surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This single-centre, prospective, randomised controlled trial will enrol 190 patients aged ≥65 years scheduled for major elective, non-cardiac surgery at Singapore General Hospital. Participants with frailty (Edmonton Frail Scale ≥6) will be randomised 1:1 to either the swSEP group (tele-supervised exercise with Fitbit Inspire 3 monitoring) or the uSEP group (standard physiotherapy education, exercise booklet and inspiratory muscle training if maximal inspiratory pressure <100 cm H₂O). The primary outcome is change in 6 min walk test distance from baseline to 1-3 days presurgery. Secondary outcomes include 30 s sit-to-stand test, handgrip strength, postoperative complications (per American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program), hospital length of stay, readmissions, five-level version of the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and adherence. Data will be analysed using t-tests, analysis of covariance, logistic regression and Cox models, with stratification by baseline nutritional status. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approved by the SingHealth Institutional Review Board (CIRB Ref: 2024/2242). Trial registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06633614). Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and academic conferences. CONTACT: irb@singhealth.com.sg TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06633614.
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 | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.003 |
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".