| Literature DB >> 25211334 |
Katherine E Mues1, Michael Deming2, David G Kleinbaum3, Philip J Budge2, Mitch Klein3, Juan S Leon3, Aishya Prakash4, Jonathan Rout4, LeAnne M Fox2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lymphedema management programs have been shown to decrease episodes of adenolymphangitis (ADLA), but the impact on lymphedema progression and of program compliance have not been thoroughly explored. Our objectives were to determine the rate of ADLA episodes and lymphedema progression over time for patients enrolled in a community-based lymphedema management program. We explored the association between program compliance and ADLA episodes as well as lymphedema progression. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25211334 PMCID: PMC4161333 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0003140
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Baseline characteristics of patients enrolled in a lymphedema management program, Khurda District, Odisha State, India, July 2009.
| N (mean) | % (SD) | |
|
| 57 | 13.93 |
|
| 218 | 58.92 |
|
| ||
| None at all | 143 | 38.65 |
| Completed at least primary school | 226 | 61.08 |
|
| ||
|
| 120 | 32.43 |
|
| 235 | 63.51 |
|
| ||
| General Caste | 147 | 39.73 |
| Other Backward Caste | 175 | 47.30 |
| Scheduled Caste | 28 | 7.57 |
| Scheduled Tribe | 20 | 5.41 |
|
| 162 | 43.78 |
|
| ||
|
| 62 | 16.76 |
| Diabetes | 12 | 3.24 |
| Cancer | 2 | 0.54 |
| Heart problems | 8 | 2.16 |
| Stomach problems | 66 | 17.84 |
|
| 100 | 27.03 |
|
| 53 | 14.32 |
|
| 25 | 16.04 |
(N = 370).
30-day rate of ADLA over time among lymphedema management participants.
| Time (months) | N | # episodes | ADLA Rate per person-month | Rate Ratio (95% CI) | Adjusted Rate Ratio (95% CI) |
| 0 | 370 | 129 | 0.35 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 1 | 351 | 92 | 0.26 | 0.68 (0.54, 0.85) | 0.68 (0.54, 0.86) |
| 2 | 349 | 101 | 0.29 | 0.74 (0.59, 0.94) | 0.73 (0.58, 0.93) |
| 3 | 339 | 88 | 0.26 | 0.64 (0.50, 0.81) | 0.63 (0.49, 0.80) |
| 6 | 324 | 45 | 0.14 | 0.34 (0.25, 0.46) | 0.32 (0.24, 0.44) |
| 12 | 321 | 74 | 0.23 | 0.58 (0.45, 0.75) | 0.57 (0.44, 0.74) |
| 18 | 332 | 86 | 0.26 | 0.66 (0.51, 0.84) | 0.65 (0.51, 0.84) |
| 24 | 316 | 72 | 0.23 | 0.57 (0.44, 0.74) | 0.57 (0.43, 0.74) |
*Rate ratios were calculated using mixed Poisson models accounting for random effect of subject, using an auto-regressive (1) correlation structure. The models used data at the individual level.
**Adjusted for patient report of number of MDAs in which they had participated.
Figure 130-day rate of ADLA episodes, Khurda District, Odisha State, India.
July 2009–July 2011. A. Overall 30-day rate of ADLA episodes. B. 30-day rate of ADLA episodes stratified by presence of inter-digital entry lesions. C. 30-day rate of ADLA episodes stratified by baseline lymphedema status: early lymphedema (stages 1–3), advanced lymphedema (stages 4–7).
30-day rate of ADLA over time among lymphedema study participants by presence of inter-digital entry lesions at current time point and lymphedema status at baseline, Khurda District, Odisha State, India, July 2009–July 2011.
| Time | N | # episodes | Observed ADLA Rate per person-month | Adjusted Rate Ratio (95% CI) | N | # episodes | Observed ADLA Rate per person-month | Adjusted Rate Ratio (95% CI) |
|
|
| |||||||
| 0 | 43 | 38 | 0.88 | 1.00 | 9 | 2 | 0.22 | 1.00 |
| 1 | 37 | 27 | 0.73 | 0.77 (0.50, 1.17) | 8 | 3 | 0.38 | 1.12 (0.58, 2.16) |
| 2 | 37 | 25 | 0.68 | 0.70 (0.45, 1.10) | 8 | 4 | 0.50 | 0.54 (0.27, 1.06) |
| 3 | 39 | 29 | 0.74 | 0.78 (0.51, 1.19) | 8 | 3 | 0.38 | 0.77 (0.38, 1.55) |
| 6 | 36 | 5 | 0.14 | 0.26 (0.14, 0.49) | 11 | 6 | 0.55 | 0.27 (0.11, 0.67) |
| 12 | 37 | 19 | 0.51 | 0.54 (0.33, 0.88) | 8 | 1 | 0.13 | 0.31 (0.15, 0.66) |
| 18 | 41 | 17 | 0.41 | 0.45 (0.27, 0.75) | 4 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.22 (0.10, 0.49) |
| 24 | 38 | 20 | 0.53 | 0.57 (0.35, 0.93) | 7 | 1 | 0.14 | 0.38 (0.17, 0.82) |
|
|
| |||||||
| 0 | 57 | 26 | 0.46 | 1.00 | 258 | 63 | 0.24 | 1.00 |
| 1 | 75 | 15 | 0.20 | 0.49 (0.29, 0.81) | 226 | 47 | 0.21 | 0.71 (0.51, 1.00) |
| 2 | 74 | 32 | 0.43 | 0.86 (0.55, 1.36) | 228 | 40 | 0.18 | 0.66 (0.46, 0.95) |
| 3 | 55 | 17 | 0.31 | 0.56 (0.33, 0.94) | 237 | 39 | 0.16 | 0.56 (0.39, 0.80) |
| 6 | 43 | 12 | 0.28 | 0.35 (0.17, 0.69) | 231 | 21 | 0.09 | 0.35 (0.23, 0.54) |
| 12 | 55 | 24 | 0.44 | 0.83 (0.51, 1.35) | 212 | 30 | 0.14 | 0.48 (0.32, 0.72) |
| 18 | 44 | 24 | 0.55 | 1.16 (0.70, 1.92) | 234 | 40 | 0.17 | 0.58 (0.41, 0.84) |
| 24 | 49 | 18 | 0.37 | 0.79 (0.46, 0.95) | 220 | 33 | 0.15 | 0.52 (0.35, 0.76)) |
The sample size at each time point may not add up to 370 because of missing data and/or lost to follow-up.
*Adjusted results of Poisson regression for correlated data with significant interaction by entry lesions and lymphedema status. Controlling for number of MDAs in which patients reported participating.
Lymphedema progression over the study period, Khurda District, Odisha State, India, July 2009–July 2011.
| Baseline | 1 Month | 2 Month | 3 Month | 6 Month | 12 Month | 18 Month | 24 Month | P-value | |
| N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | ||
| Lymphedema Stage | |||||||||
| 1–2 | 184 (48.73) | 166 (47.29) | 183 (52.44) | 181 (53.39) | 175 (54.01) | 179 (55.76) | 173 (52.11) | 190 (60.13) | 0.0064 |
| 3–4 | 139 (37.57) | 146 (41.60) | 126 (36.10) | 115 (33.92) | 105 (32.41) | 97 (30.22) | 115 (34.64) | 80 (25.32) | 0.0006 |
| 5–6 | 47 (12.70) | 39 (11.11) | 40 (11.46) | 43 (12.68) | 44 (13.58) | 45 (14.02) | 44 (13.25) | 46 (14.56) | 0.4795 |
| Lymphedema Progression Since Previous Time Point | |||||||||
| Progression | NA | 46 (13.11) | 27 (7.74) | 16 (4.72) | 18 (5.56) | 28 (8.72) | 42 (12.65) | 16 (5.06) | 0.0004 |
| No change | NA | 278 (79.20) | 284 (81.38) | 301 (88.79) | 283 (87.35) | 264 (82.24) | 266 (80.12) | 240 (75.95) | 0.3139 |
| Regression | NA | 27 (7.69) | 38 (10.89) | 22 (6.49) | 23 (7.10) | 24 (7.23) | 24 (7.23) | 60 (18.99) | <0.0001 |
| Lymphedema Progression Since Baseline | |||||||||
| Progression | NA | 46 (13.11) | 44 (12.61) | 42 (12.39) | 36 (11.11) | 43 (13.40) | 55 (16.57) | 29 (9.18) | 0.1088 |
| No change | NA | 278 (79.20) | 268 (76.79) | 257 (75.81) | 245 (75.62) | 227 (70.72) | 232 (69.88) | 218 (68.99) | 0.0026 |
| Regression | NA | 27 (7.69) | 37 (10.60) | 40 (11.80) | 43 (13.27) | 51 (15.89) | 45 (13.55) | 69 (21.84) | <0.0001 |
*Denotes the p-value for difference between baseline and 24 months.
Distribution of program compliance and potential predictors of compliance to lymphedema management techniques over time among patients enrolled in the lymphedema management program, Khurda District, Odisha State, India, July 2009–July 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
| P-value | ||||||
| N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | ||
| Overall program compliance | 10 | 2.70 | 241 | 74.38 | 213 | 66.36 | 211 | 63.55 | 200 | 63.29 | <0.0001 |
| Knowledge on how to care for lymphedema | 66 | 17.84 | 324 | 100.00 | 320 | 100.00 | 332 | 100.00 | 316 | 100.00 | <0.0001 |
| Difficulty accessing clean water | 77 | 20.87 | 8 | 2.47 | 14 | 4.36 | 30 | 9.04 | 32 | 10.13 | 0.0001 |
| Difficulty accessing soap | 187 | 50.54 | 16 | 4.94 | 16 | 4.98 | 16 | 4.98 | 42 | 13.29 | <0.0001 |
| Difficulty accessing cream | 185 | 50.00 | 20 | 6.17 | 18 | 5.61 | 50 | 15.06 | 41 | 12.97 | <0.0001 |
| Difficulty accessing oral medicine during ADLA | 205 | 55.41 | 110 | 33.95 | 119 | 37.07 | 162 | 48.80 | 187 | 59.18 | 0.2849 |
| Difficulty accessing the hospital | 226 | 61.08 | 138 | 42.59 | 159 | 49.53 | 174 | 52.41 | 188 | 59.49 | 0.5477 |
| Own mosquito net | 306 | 82.70 | 241 | 74.38 | 235 | 73.21 | 258 | 77.71 | 251 | 79.43 | 0.2743 |
| Presence of inter-digital entry lesions | 100 | 27.03 | 79 | 24.38 | 92 | 28.66 | 85 | 25.60 | 87 | 27.53 | 0.8936 |
| Number of MDAs (Mean, SD) | 2.20 | 1.50 | 2.20 | 1.40 | 2.20 | 1.40 | 2.10 | 1.50 | 3.20 | 1.70 | <0.0001 |
| ADLA episodes in the past 30 days (Mean, SD) | 0.42 | 0.92 | 0.14 | 0.45 | 0.23 | 0.71 | 0.26 | 0.72 | 0.23 | 0.69 | 0.0032 |
| ADLA episodes in the past 6 months (Mean, SD) | 1.06 | 1.60 | 0.62 | 1.15 | 0.55 | 1.00 | 0.71 | 1.27 | 0.65 | 1.39 | 0.0007 |
| Disability assessment score (Mean, SD) | 66.18 | 22.76 | 58.21 | 16.36 | 60.08 | 18.00 | 63.85 | 19.68 | 60.41 | 19.04 | 0.0004 |
*Denotes the p-value for the difference between baseline and 24 months.
Program compliance was measured through a weighted compliance score to all techniques and dichotomized into two groups: compliant and non-compliant. Scores were weighted by the presence of inter-digital entry lesions.
Predictors of compliance to lymphedema management techniques among patients enrolled in a lymphedema management program, Khurda District, Odisha State, India, July 2009–July 2011.
| Predictor | Unadjusted OR (95% CI) | Adjusted OR (95% CI) |
| Age | 0.98 (0.97, 0.99) | 0.98 (0.97, 0.989 |
| Male gender | 1.18 (0.94, 1.47) | |
| ≥ Primary school education | 1.26 (1.01, 1.58) | 1.19 (0.90, 1.57) |
| Paid work status | 1.07 (0.87, 1.31) | |
| Owning mosquito net | 1.04 (0.86, 1.27) | |
| Presence of chronic conditions | 1.13 (0.95, 1.33) | |
| Number of ADLA episodes (30 day) | 0.89 (0.79, 0.99) | 0.98 (0.81, 1.19) |
| Number of ADLA episodes (6 month) | 0.90 (0.84, 0.95) | 0.92 (0.84, 1.01) |
| Difficult access to water | 0.47 (0.35, 0.63) | 1.09 (0.74, 1.63) |
| Difficult access to soap | 0.21 (0.16, 0.27) | 0.39 (0.27, 0.56) |
| Difficult access to antifungal cream | 0.23 (0.18, 0.28) | 0.35 (0.26, 0.47) |
| Difficult access to antibiotics | 0.72 (0.62, 0.83) | 0.93 (0.74, 1.18) |
| Difficult access to the hospital | 0.77 (0.66, 0.89) | 0.96 (0.76, 1.22) |
| Increasing disability assessment score | 0.99 (0.98, 0.99) | 1.00 (1.00, 1.01) |
| Presence of entry lesions | 1.18 (0.97, 1.43) | |
| Advanced lymphedema stage at baseline | 1.16 (0.84, 1.59) | |
| Baseline ADLA rate | 0.29 (0.01, 17.08) |
*P-value <0.05.
**Difficult vs. not difficult.
Other chronic conditions include high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer, heart problems, stomach problems.
Association between compliance to lymphedema management techniques at the previous time point and 30-day rate of ADLA episodes, Khurda District, Odisha State, India, July 2009–July 2011.
| Technique | Rate Ratio (95% CI) |
|
| |
| Entry Lesions | 1.44 (1.11, 1.86) |
| No Entry Lesions | 0.87 (0.69, 1.10) |
|
| |
| Entry Lesions | 0.67 (0.43, 1.04) |
| Entry Lesions | 1.45 (0.91, 2.29) |
| No Entry Lesions | 0.26 (0.15, 0.45) |
| No Entry Lesions | 0.57 (0.42, 0.77) |
|
| |
| Entry Lesions | 1.09 (0.81, 1.46) |
|
| 1.04 (0.85, 1.26) |
*Adjusted results of Poisson regression for correlated data. Each rate ratio is comparing the rate of ADLA episodes among those who are compliant to the rate among those who are not compliant within the specified clinical disease groups.
Dichotomized compliance score summarizing compliance to soap, cream, elevation, exercise, and footwear. Adjusted for baseline lymphedema status (advanced vs. early), access to water, access to soap, access to cream, access to the hospital, and number of time patient participated in MDA.
Interaction with inter-digital entry lesions at previous time point was statistically significant.
Inter-digital entry lesions at previous time point.
Interaction with inter-digital entry lesions at previous time point and baseline lymphedema status statistically significant.
Adjusted for access to water, access to soap, access to cream, access to the hospital, number of time patient participated in MDA, and compliance to all other techniques.
Lymphedema status at baseline.
Only among those with inter-digital entry lesions at the previous time point. Adjusted for access to water, access to soap, access to cream, access to the hospital, number of time patient participated in MDA, lymphedema status at baseline (advanced vs. early), and compliance to all other techniques.
Adjusted for baseline lymphedema status (advanced vs. early), inter-digital entry lesions at the previous time point, access to water, access to soap, access to cream, access to the hospital, number of time patient participated in MDA, and compliance to all other techniques.
Association between compliance to lymphedema management techniques and lymphedema progression since previous time point. Khurda District, Odisha State, India, July 2009–July 2011.
| Technique | OR (95% CI) |
|
| 0.84 (0.62, 1.12) |
|
| 0.63 (0.41, 0.98) |
|
| |
| Entry Lesions | 0.53 (0.21, 1.29) |
|
| 1.11 (0.74, 1.67) |
|
| 1.04 (0.74, 1.47) |
|
| 0.93 (0.69, 1.26) |
*Adjusted results of logistic regression for correlated data. Each rate ratio is comparing the rate of ADLA episodes among those who are compliant to the rate among those who are not compliant within the specified clinical disease groups.
Dichotomized compliance score summarizing compliance to soap, cream, elevation, exercise, and footwear. Adjusted for baseline lymphedema status (advanced vs. early), inter-digital entry lesions at the previous time point, and number of time patient participated in MDA.
Adjusted for baseline lymphedema status (advanced vs. early), inter-digital entry lesions at the previous time point, number of time patient participated in MDA, and compliance to all other techniques.
Only among those with inter-digital entry lesions at the previous time point. Adjusted for baseline lymphedema status (advanced vs. early), number of time patient participated in MDA, and compliance to soap, elevation, exercise, and wearing footwear.
Inter-digital entry lesions at previous time point.