Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

Perioperative interventions aiming to enhance physical activity in the medium to long term may slightly increase engagement in physical activity, physical fitness and quality of life compared to usual care.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index > metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Michael W Pritchard 1, Amy Robinson 1, Sharon R Lewis 2, Suse V Gibson 3, Antony Chuter 4, Robert Copeland 5, Euan Lawson 6, Andrew F Smith 7,*

1 Lancaster Patient Safety Research Unit, Royal Lancaster Infirmary, Lancaster, UK
2 Bone and Joint Health, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
3 Department of Health and Care, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK
4 Patient and public involvement representative, Sussex, UK
5 Centre for Sport and Exercise Health, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
6 Lancaster Medical School, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
7 Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Lancaster Infirmary, Lancaster, UK
* Corresponding author Email: Andrew.Smith@mbht.nhs.uk

Declared competing interests of authors: Robert Copeland reports grants from Yorkshire Cancer Research (Harrogate, UK). Suse V Gibson reports a studentship grant from the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration North West Coast (University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK), paid to the University of Central Lancashire (Preston, UK). Andrew F Smith reports grants from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (Brussels, Belgium), and that he is a co-ordinating editor for the Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group, an editor of Anaesthesia and a performance assessor/team leader on the General Medical Council (London, UK). He also reports consulting fees (personal payment for advice on new airway devices).

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document