TY - JOUR
T1 - Expert Consensus on Self-Reported Physical, Nutritional, and Psychological Screening Tools for Prehabilitation in Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery
T2 - An International Delphi Study
AU - Global (P)rehabilitation Initiative Collaborative Group
AU - Reeves, Jack
AU - Karunaratne, Sascha
AU - Alexander, Kate
AU - Petridis, Alexandria
AU - Carey, Sharon
AU - Dhillon, Haryana M.
AU - Denehy, Linda
AU - Solomon, Michael
AU - Riedel, Bernhard
AU - Koh, Cherry
AU - McBride, Kate
AU - Gillis, Chelsia
AU - White, Kate
AU - Hirst, Nicholas
AU - Shadid, Zaid
AU - Rahman, Ishraque
AU - Pillinger, Neil
AU - Steffens, Daniel
AU - Belkhadir, Zakaria
AU - Alsoud, Yousef Abo
AU - Yıldırıms, Yasemin
AU - Van Klei, Wilton
AU - Aljbali, Waled
AU - Ibrahim, Walid
AU - Frontera, Walter R.
AU - Zaydfudim, Victor
AU - Lohsiriwat, Varut
AU - Mousafeiris, Vasileios
AU - Gorey, Varsha
AU - Parkington, Tom
AU - Bright, Tim
AU - Sammour, Tarik
AU - Triantafyllou, Tania
AU - Salem, Talat Abu
AU - González-Suárez, Susana
AU - Apostolaki, Styliani
AU - Mancin, Stefano
AU - Hogan, Sophie
AU - Burden, Sorrel
AU - Manfredelli, Simone
AU - Yaceczko, Shelby
AU - Carey, Sharon
AU - Philp, Shannon
AU - Filizoglu, Seymanur Altintas
AU - Atici, Semra Demirli
AU - Ismail, Sawsan
AU - Rajsic, Sasa
AU - Braungart, Sarah
AU - Abdelmohsen, Sarah
AU - Elsheikh, Sara S.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2026.
PY - 2026
Y1 - 2026
N2 - Background: Prehabilitation can decrease postoperative complications and enhance recovery for people with gastrointestinal cancer. Preoperative screening may identify individuals at highest risk of poor postoperative outcomes, enabling targeted and tailored interventions. Despite this, optimal tools for screening patients before surgery remain unclear. This Delphi study sought to achieve international consensus on appropriate screening tools to identify patients at increased risk of postoperative complications before undergoing gastrointestinal cancer surgery. Methods: A three-round iterative Delphi survey was distributed to a global multidisciplinary network of prehabilitation experts. Respondents were asked to rate screening tools, identified through a scoping review, on a 5-point Likert scale based on the appropriateness of their use for adult patients undergoing gastrointestinal cancer surgery. The screening tools were categorized as evaluating either physical, nutritional, or psychological domains. A consensus criterion was applied in the second and third rounds, which required ≥ 70% of respondents to rate a given tool as ≥ 4 for it to proceed to future rounds. Results: Overall, 308 self-nominated prehabilitation experts rated the screening tools. Of 26 screening tools (including 9 physical, 7 nutritional, and 10 psychological), consensus was achieved for three physical, three nutritional, and four psychological tools. Conclusion: Based on Delphi consensus of global prehabilitation experts, 10 self-reported screening tools reached consensus. Given that tool selection was informed by Delphi consensus rather than empirical validation, prospective studies are necessary to assess whether these instruments accurately stratify surgical risk and identify candidates most likely to benefit from prehabilitation.
AB - Background: Prehabilitation can decrease postoperative complications and enhance recovery for people with gastrointestinal cancer. Preoperative screening may identify individuals at highest risk of poor postoperative outcomes, enabling targeted and tailored interventions. Despite this, optimal tools for screening patients before surgery remain unclear. This Delphi study sought to achieve international consensus on appropriate screening tools to identify patients at increased risk of postoperative complications before undergoing gastrointestinal cancer surgery. Methods: A three-round iterative Delphi survey was distributed to a global multidisciplinary network of prehabilitation experts. Respondents were asked to rate screening tools, identified through a scoping review, on a 5-point Likert scale based on the appropriateness of their use for adult patients undergoing gastrointestinal cancer surgery. The screening tools were categorized as evaluating either physical, nutritional, or psychological domains. A consensus criterion was applied in the second and third rounds, which required ≥ 70% of respondents to rate a given tool as ≥ 4 for it to proceed to future rounds. Results: Overall, 308 self-nominated prehabilitation experts rated the screening tools. Of 26 screening tools (including 9 physical, 7 nutritional, and 10 psychological), consensus was achieved for three physical, three nutritional, and four psychological tools. Conclusion: Based on Delphi consensus of global prehabilitation experts, 10 self-reported screening tools reached consensus. Given that tool selection was informed by Delphi consensus rather than empirical validation, prospective studies are necessary to assess whether these instruments accurately stratify surgical risk and identify candidates most likely to benefit from prehabilitation.
KW - Delphi study
KW - Gastrointestinal cancer
KW - Prehabilitation
KW - Preoperative screening
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105033982707
U2 - 10.1245/s10434-026-19356-z
DO - 10.1245/s10434-026-19356-z
M3 - Article
C2 - 41832364
AN - SCOPUS:105033982707
SN - 1068-9265
JO - Annals of Surgical Oncology
JF - Annals of Surgical Oncology
ER -