Limited high-quality research has focused on the efficacy of lymphedema treatments and symptomatic relief. With that in mind, the authors conducted a cross-sectional survey to describe the presentation of breast cancer-related lymphedema, treatment modalities used, and perceived effectiveness. An electronic validated questionnaire to assess the presentation of lymphedema, severity of swelling and discomfort, number of modalities tried, and the benefits gained from treatment was completed by the Review and Survey Group of the Breast Cancer Network of Australia. Thirty-five percent of participants reported the presence of lymphedema, a majority of which reported it to be mild or moderate for magnitude of swelling and for discomfort. The correlation was weak between magnitude of swelling and discomfort. Compression, massage, and exercise were the most commonly used modalities in these patients. Notably, chest wall or breast lymphedema--about which research is lacking--was as common as hand lymphedema. Women experienced discomfort and physical changes, although the severity of the two was not related. Some benefit was reported for all modalities, but no particular modality was considered extremely helpful. Oncology nurses are ideally positioned to monitor women for early signs of swelling and to advise women on the range of treatments available.
Background: A variety of objective and subjective assessments are available for clinical assessment of lymphedema. The aim of this study was to explore the clinical reasoning underpinning the assessment of upper limb lymphedema by experienced lymphedema clinicians. Methods and Results: Semistructured, individual, interviews were conducted with lymphedema therapists (n = 14) from a variety of treatment settings. These interviews were conducted after observations of these therapists assessing patients with lymphedema and focused on: (1) the therapists' rationale for the assessments selected, (2) how the data were analyzed, and (3) how the information was then used. Assessment selection was guided by the purpose of the visit, patient preference, resources, and time available. Subjective measures of visible and palpated tissue changes were used to target treatment, and objective measures of circumference and bioimpedance spectroscopy and patient report of symptoms informed treatment evaluation and disease progression. Objective data collected were primarily analyzed for interlimb difference and change between appointments. Conclusions: A range of clinical assessments were used in the evaluation of lymphedema to detect the presence of lymphedema, estimate the extent of soft tissue change, understand the patient experience of lymphedema, and evaluate treatment response. A primary determinant for the collection of objective measures was the appointment duration. Current methods of data analysis and reporting do not facilitate the review of change over time.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.