OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the relationship of muscular strength, as measured by the handgrip strength (HGS) test, with pain, fitness, fatigue, mood, and autonomic nervous system function in breast cancer survivors. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study comprising 95 breast cancer survivors was conducted. HGS; heart rate variability; pressure pain threshold of the neck, shoulder, hand, and tibia of the affected side; and fitness level (6-min walk test, neck-shoulder mobility, vertical jump, sit-to-stand test, and trunk curl test) were assessed as outcomes. Participants completed the Fatigue Piper Scale and Profile of Mood States questionnaires and the neck-shoulder visual analog scale. Correlation was conducted to examine the relationship of HGS with pain, fitness, fatigue, and mood. RESULTS: We observed a fair relationship of HGS with shoulder pain and a moderate to fair relationship with fitness (all P < 0.01; ρ range, 0.24-0.56). The relationship between HGS and heart rate variability (high-frequency domain) was weak (P = 0.049, ρ = 0.23). Likewise, the relationship between HGS and Profile of Mood States subscales ranged from weak to fair (all P < 0.001; ρ range, -0.22 to -0.36). HGS showed a weak relationship with Fatigue Piper Scale (all P < 0.01; ρ range, -0.28 to -0.35). Passive shoulder flexion, fatigue, and vertical jump were independent and significant predictors of HGS (P < 0.01; R = 0.466). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the HGS test might be an important correlate of health in breast cancer survivors. This finding suggests that HGS could be recommended as an adjuvant method of evaluation, which may help with efficiency of clinical practice. Further research on breast cancer patients is needed to confirm or refute these findings.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the relationship of muscular strength, as measured by the handgrip strength (HGS) test, with pain, fitness, fatigue, mood, and autonomic nervous system function in breast cancer survivors. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study comprising 95 breast cancer survivors was conducted. HGS; heart rate variability; pressure pain threshold of the neck, shoulder, hand, and tibia of the affected side; and fitness level (6-min walk test, neck-shoulder mobility, vertical jump, sit-to-stand test, and trunk curl test) were assessed as outcomes. Participants completed the Fatigue Piper Scale and Profile of Mood States questionnaires and the neck-shoulder visual analog scale. Correlation was conducted to examine the relationship of HGS with pain, fitness, fatigue, and mood. RESULTS: We observed a fair relationship of HGS with shoulder pain and a moderate to fair relationship with fitness (all P < 0.01; ρ range, 0.24-0.56). The relationship between HGS and heart rate variability (high-frequency domain) was weak (P = 0.049, ρ = 0.23). Likewise, the relationship between HGS and Profile of Mood States subscales ranged from weak to fair (all P < 0.001; ρ range, -0.22 to -0.36). HGS showed a weak relationship with Fatigue Piper Scale (all P < 0.01; ρ range, -0.28 to -0.35). Passive shoulder flexion, fatigue, and vertical jump were independent and significant predictors of HGS (P < 0.01; R = 0.466). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the HGS test might be an important correlate of health in breast cancer survivors. This finding suggests that HGS could be recommended as an adjuvant method of evaluation, which may help with efficiency of clinical practice. Further research on breast cancerpatients is needed to confirm or refute these findings.
Authors: Laura A A Gilliam; Kelsey H Fisher-Wellman; Chien-Te Lin; Jill M Maples; Brook L Cathey; P Darrell Neufer Journal: Free Radic Biol Med Date: 2013-09-07 Impact factor: 7.376
Authors: Irene Cantarero-Villanueva; Carolina Fernández-Lao; Lourdes Díaz-Rodríguez; Antonio Ignacio Cuesta-Vargas; César Fernández-de-las-Peñas; Barbara F Piper; Manuel Arroyo-Morales Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2013-05-22 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Si-Woon Park; Ilkyun Lee; Joong Il Kim; Hyuna Park; Jong Doo Lee; Kyeong Eun Uhm; Ji Hye Hwang; Eun Sook Lee; So-Youn Jung; Yong Hyun Park; Ji Youl Lee Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-08-25 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Barbara Resnick; Ann L Gruber-Baldini; Gregory Hicks; Glen Ostir; N Jennifer Klinedinst; Denise Orwig; Jay Magaziner Journal: Rehabil Nurs Date: 2015-10-23 Impact factor: 1.625
Authors: Prue Cormie; Kate Pumpa; Daniel A Galvão; Elizabeth Turner; Nigel Spry; Christobel Saunders; Yvonne Zissiadis; Robert U Newton Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2013-04-20 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: T Veni; S Boyas; B Beaune; H Bourgeois; A Rahmani; S Landry; A Bochereau; S Durand; B Morel Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-06-24 Impact factor: 3.603