Normative Volume Difference Between the Dominant and Nondominant Upper Limbs in Healthy Older Women

Dylke, Elizabeth; Yee, Jasmine; Ward, Leigh C.; Foroughi, Nasim; Kilbreath, Sharon L.

doi:10.1089/lrb.2012.0011

Cited by 47 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The inter-limb ratio was determined by comparing the unaffected or non-dominant arm to the affected or dominant arm. A perometer (Perometer, 1000M Juzo) was used to determine limb circumferences and volumes using a standardized protocol [8]. Bilateral hand lengths (middle finger tip to ulnar styloid) were measured to ensure that limb volume measures commenced from the ulnar styloid [8].…”

Section: Clinical Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A perometer (Perometer, 1000M Juzo) was used to determine limb circumferences and volumes using a standardized protocol [8]. Bilateral hand lengths (middle finger tip to ulnar styloid) were measured to ensure that limb volume measures commenced from the ulnar styloid [8]. Perometry arm volume measurements (wrist to 40 cm proximally) were determined using the custom-modified Peroplus TM software.…”

Section: Clinical Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For 10 participants (12%) in whom one or both arms were not of sufficient length to enable a 40-cm measurement, the maximum length available bilaterally was used. Arm volume was determined in two ways: (1) by converting the circumference measurements into volumes using the formula for a truncated cone [8]; and (2) using the perometer software. Perometerdetermined arm volumes were not available for seven (8%) participants due to software failure.…”

Section: Clinical Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many of these appear to have been chosen for their ease of use [7] and evidence is lacking to determine the origin of others. Recently, normatively determined thresholds were derived for circumference and volume measurements [8]. These thresholds, like those derived for BIS [6], account for limb dominance and have been set at three standard deviations (3SD) above the mean of a control population.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These thresholds, like those derived for BIS [6], account for limb dominance and have been set at three standard deviations (3SD) above the mean of a control population. However, it has been suggested that the 3SD approach may be overly conservative [8,9]. Furthermore, which of these tools and thresholds best identify LE is unknown, as comparison against a reasonable reference standard has not been undertaken.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Diagnosis of upper limb lymphedema: development of an evidence-based approach

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The diagnosis of secondary upper limb lymphedema (LE) is complicated by the lack of an agreed-upon measurement tool and diagnostic threshold. The aim of this study was to determine which of the many commonly used and normatively determined clinical diagnostic thresholds has the best diagnostic accuracy of secondary upper limb LE, when compared to diagnosis by an appropriate reference standard, lymphoscintigraphy. Material and methods: The arms of women treated for breast cancer with and without a previous diagnosis of LE, as well as healthy controls, were assessed using lymphoscintigraphy, bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) and perometry. Dermal backflow score determined from lymphoscintigraphy imaging assessment (reference standard) was compared with diagnosis by both commonly used and normatively determined diagnostic thresholds for volume and circumference measurements as well as BIS. Results: For those with established dermal backflow, all commonly used and normatively determined diagnostic thresholds accurately identified presence of LE compared with lymphoscintigraphy diagnosis. In participants with mild to moderate changes in dermal backflow, only a normatively determined diagnostic threshold, set at two standard deviations above the norm, for arm circumference and full arm BIS were found to have both high sensitivity (81% and 76%, respectively) and specificity (96% and 93%, respectively). For this group, strong, and clinically useful, positive (23 and 10, respectively) and negative likelihood (0.2 and 0.3) ratios were found for both the circumference and bioimpedance diagnostic thresholds. Conclusion: For the first time, evidence-based clinical diagnostic thresholds have been established for secondary LE. With mild LE, normatively determined circumference and BIS thresholds are superior to the commonly used thresholds.

show abstract

Section: Clinical Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Clinical Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Clinical Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Diagnosis of upper limb lymphedema: development of an evidence-based approach

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Adjuvant taxanes and the development of breast cancer-related arm lymphoedema

Cariati

Bains

Grootendorst

et al. 2015

British Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Agreement between telerehabilitation involving caregivers and face-to-face clinical assessment of lymphedema in breast cancer survivors

Galiano‐Castillo

Ariza-García

Cantarero‐Villanueva

et al. 2013

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lymphedema is a lifetime complication of breast cancer survivors that can limit their participation in recreational or strenuous daily activities. Follow-up of lymphedema using an Internet application could help patients to determine the influence on their condition of these activities and adapt them accordingly. We aimed to determine the level of agreement between lymphedema assessment by telerehabilitation and by the traditional face-to-face method. Thirty breast cancer survivors participated in a descriptive study of repeated measures using a crossover design. Patients attended a session for clinical face-to-face and real-time online telerehabilitation assessments of lymphedema. There was a 120-min interval between these two sessions. The order of sessions was randomly selected for each patient. A caregiver (relative or friend) conducted the telerehabilitation assessment using a system that includes a specific tool based on an arm diagram for measuring the participant's arm circumferences via a telehealth application. All outcome measures showed reliability estimates (α) ≥ 0.90; the lowest reliability was obtained for the total volume on the non-affected side (α = 0.90). The diagnosis of lymphedema by the two methods also showed good inter-rater reliability (Rho = 0.89). These preliminary findings support the use of an Internet-based system to assess lymphedema in breast cancer survivors, offering carers a useful role in helping patients to follow up this lifetime health problem.

show abstract

Normative Volume Difference Between the Dominant and Nondominant Upper Limbs in Healthy Older Women

Abstract: New circumference and volume criteria based on normative data, taking arm dominance into consideration, will allow for more accurate diagnosis of changes in limb volume, allowing treatment to be started and monitored appropriately.

Cited by 47 publications

References 26 publications

Diagnosis of upper limb lymphedema: development of an evidence-based approach

Diagnosis of upper limb lymphedema: development of an evidence-based approach

Adjuvant taxanes and the development of breast cancer-related arm lymphoedema

Agreement between telerehabilitation involving caregivers and face-to-face clinical assessment of lymphedema in breast cancer survivors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About