| Literature DB >> 26327858 |
Iwona Malicka1, Agnieszka Rosseger1, Justyna Hanuszkiewicz1, Marek Woźniewski1.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Secondary lymphedema affects approximately 40% of women treated for breast cancer and is recognized as a major problem associated with the therapy of malignant tumors. Consequently, new therapeutic methods are constantly being sought to effectively eliminate the condition. One of the new forms of edema management, especially in the initial stages of edematous development, is Kinesiology Taping (KT). AIM OF THE STUDY: The aim of the study was to assess the effects of KT applications on the extent of lymphedema of the upper extremity in women post cancer treatment.Entities:
Keywords: Kinesiology Taping; breast cancer; lymphedema
Year: 2014 PMID: 26327858 PMCID: PMC4520367 DOI: 10.5114/pm.2014.44997
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prz Menopauzalny ISSN: 1643-8876
Characteristics of study patients and significance of values for differences between the study group (1) and the control group (2)
| Parameter | Group 1, | Group 2, |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age [years] | 60.1 ± 6.3 | 59.5 ± 5.7 | 0.56 |
| Body mass [kg] | 75.4 ± 12.8 | 76.2 ± 11.8 | 0.69 |
| Body height [cm] | 161.5 ± 3.9 | 159.9 ± 7.1 | 0.29 |
| Radical surgery [ | 11 | 12 | 0.87 |
| Surgery on the right breast [ | 7 | 8 | 0.76 |
| Post-surgery period [years] | 6.0 ± 4.8 | 5.8 ± 4.8 | 0.76 |
| Adjunctive treatment [ | 14 | 13 | 0.76 |
| Radiotherapy [ | 10 | 5 | 0.11 |
| Chemotherapy [ | 12 | 10 | 0.53 |
| Hormone therapy [ | 9 | 7 | 0.53 |
Example circumference result calculation into volume values
| Centimetres from wrist | Circumferences (cm) | Segment number | Volume (ml) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Right (affected) | Left (not affected) | Right | Left | ||
| 0 | 17 | 17 | |||
| 10 | 24 | 21 | 1 | 338 | 288 |
| 20 | 26.5 | 26 | 2 | 508 | 441 |
| 30 | 28.5 | 26.5 | 3 | 602 | 549 |
| 40 | 33.5 | 31.8 | 4 | 767 | 678 |
| Edema | 258 | ||||
Fig. 1A) KT applications in subgroup 1. B) KT applications in subgroup 2
Significance of differences between edematous and the opposite extremity
| Group | Edematous extremity | Non-edematous extremity | Baseline assessment | Final assessment | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline assessment | Final assessment | Baseline assessment | Final assessment | |||
| Study group (1) | 2511.43 ± 532.26 | 2275.51 ± 482.12 | 2230.78 ± 353.61 | 2230.78 ± 353.61 | 0.0005 | 0.47 |
| Control group (2) | 2344.92 ± 311.67 | 2356.42 ± 310.96 | 2218.92 ± 272.10 | 2218.92 ± 272.10 | 0.02 | 0.02 |
Significance of differences between preliminary and final assessments within and between groups
| Group | Difference: edematous extremity vs. non-edematous extremity, V [ml] | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline assessment | Final assessment |
| |
| Study group (1) | 280.35 ± 231.89 | 44.78 ± 226.38 | 0.0009 |
| Control group (2) | 126.00 ± 192.64 | 137.50 ± 192.74 | 0.36 |
|
| 0.04 | 0.30 | X |
Fig. 2Mean values [ml] obtained in 2 subgroups depending on the type of KT applications
Significance of differences found in 2 subgroups depending on the type of KT applications
| A) KT with anastomoses | |||
| X | 0.06 | 0.01 | |
| 0.04 | 0.58 | 0.70 | |
| B) KT without anastomoses | |||
|
| |||
| X | 0.01 | 0.01 | |
| 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.70 |
1 – Edematous extremity, assessment 1 [ml], 2 – Edematous extremity, assessment 2 [ml], 3 – Edematous extremity, assessment 3 [ml], NE – non-edematous extremity [ml]