PURPOSE/ OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of reflexology, a complementary therapy that applies pressure to specific areas of the feet. DESIGN: Longitudinal, randomized clinical trial. SETTING:Thirteen community-based medical oncology clinics across the midwestern United States. SAMPLE: A convenience sample of 385 predominantly Caucasian women with advanced-stage breast cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy. METHODS: Following the baseline interview, women were randomized into three primary groups: reflexology (n = 95), lay foot manipulation (LFM) (n = 95), or conventional care (n = 96). Two preliminary reflexology (n = 51) and LFM (n = 48) test groups were used to establish the protocols. Participants were interviewed again postintervention at study weeks 5 and 11. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Breast cancer-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL), physical functioning, and symptoms. FINDINGS: No adverse events were reported. A longitudinal comparison revealed significant improvements in physical functioning for the reflexology group compared to the control group (p = 0.04). Severity of dyspnea was reduced in the reflexology group compared to the control group (p < 0.01) and the LFM group (p = 0.02). No differences were found on breast cancer-specific HRQOL, depressive symptomatology, state anxiety, pain, and nausea. CONCLUSIONS:Reflexology may be added to existing evidence-based supportive care to improve HRQOL for patients with advanced-stage breast cancer during chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Reflexology can be recommended for safety and usefulness in relieving dyspnea and enhancing functional status among women with advanced-stage breast cancer.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE/ OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of reflexology, a complementary therapy that applies pressure to specific areas of the feet. DESIGN: Longitudinal, randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Thirteen community-based medical oncology clinics across the midwestern United States. SAMPLE: A convenience sample of 385 predominantly Caucasian women with advanced-stage breast cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy. METHODS: Following the baseline interview, women were randomized into three primary groups: reflexology (n = 95), lay foot manipulation (LFM) (n = 95), or conventional care (n = 96). Two preliminary reflexology (n = 51) and LFM (n = 48) test groups were used to establish the protocols. Participants were interviewed again postintervention at study weeks 5 and 11. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Breast cancer-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL), physical functioning, and symptoms. FINDINGS: No adverse events were reported. A longitudinal comparison revealed significant improvements in physical functioning for the reflexology group compared to the control group (p = 0.04). Severity of dyspnea was reduced in the reflexology group compared to the control group (p < 0.01) and the LFM group (p = 0.02). No differences were found on breast cancer-specific HRQOL, depressive symptomatology, state anxiety, pain, and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: Reflexology may be added to existing evidence-based supportive care to improve HRQOL for patients with advanced-stage breast cancer during chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Reflexology can be recommended for safety and usefulness in relieving dyspnea and enhancing functional status among women with advanced-stage breast cancer.
Authors: Donald M Sharp; Mary B Walker; Amulya Chaturvedi; Sunil Upadhyay; Abdel Hamid; Andrew A Walker; Julie S Bateman; Fiona Braid; Karen Ellwood; Claire Hebblewhite; Teresa Hope; Michael Lines; Leslie G Walker Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2009-11-10 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Heather Greenlee; Lynda G Balneaves; Linda E Carlson; Misha Cohen; Gary Deng; Dawn Hershman; Matthew Mumber; Jane Perlmutter; Dugald Seely; Ananda Sen; Suzanna M Zick; Debu Tripathy Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr Date: 2014-11
Authors: Alla Sikorskii; Gwen Wyatt; Rebecca Lehto; David Victorson; Terry Badger; Thaddeus Pace Journal: Res Nurs Health Date: 2017-11-11 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: Gwen Wyatt; Alla Sikorskii; Irena Tesnjak; David Victorson; Gordan Srkalovic Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-03-25 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Thomas M Atkinson; Angela M Stover; Daniel F Storfer; Rebecca M Saracino; Thomas A D'Agostino; Denise Pergolizzi; Konstantina Matsoukas; Yuelin Li; Ethan Basch Journal: Epidemiol Rev Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Alla Sikorskii; Pratim Guha Niyogi; David Victorson; Deimante Tamkus; Gwen Wyatt Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Heather Greenlee; Melissa J DuPont-Reyes; Lynda G Balneaves; Linda E Carlson; Misha R Cohen; Gary Deng; Jillian A Johnson; Matthew Mumber; Dugald Seely; Suzanna M Zick; Lindsay M Boyce; Debu Tripathy Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 508.702