Brent Burbridge1, Ian Y M Chan2, Rhonda Bryce3, Hyun J Lim3, Grant Stoneham4, Hager Haggag2, Christine Roh2. 1. Medical Imaging, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada. Electronic address: brent.burbridge@usask.ca. 2. College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada. 3. Clinical Research Support Unit, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada. 4. Medical Imaging, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Placement of arm ports, or totally implanted venous access devices, is a common practice in our interventional radiology suite. We implant a miniaturized port in the upper arm for the provision of long-term chemotherapy. We hypothesized that there was general satisfaction with these arm ports and they have a minimal negative impact on quality of life. In this study we aimed to assess our hypotheses. METHODS: We surveyed subjects, who having previously received an arm port for chemotherapy to treat a malignancy, attended the interventional room for its removal. The survey assessed the port's effect on lifestyle, the degree of device-related pain, the acceptance of the port, and the willingness to have another port in the future. RESULTS: Survey responses from 77 subjects were reviewed. On a scale of 1 (most negative) to 10 (most positive), respondents indicated that the port system was a very positive enhancement to their treatment (satisfaction = 9.2 ± 2.0 and positivity = 8.8 ± 2.2). The port had little impact on daily activities. The mean score for the likelihood of choosing to have another port placed if additional treatment was required was 9.1 ± 2.1. DISCUSSION: The arm port in this study did not negatively impact subject satisfaction and quality of life for this cohort. Most subjects rated the device utility highly and felt that the port was a positive enhancement to their treatment, one that they would possibly utilise again in future, if need be.
PURPOSE: Placement of arm ports, or totally implanted venous access devices, is a common practice in our interventional radiology suite. We implant a miniaturized port in the upper arm for the provision of long-term chemotherapy. We hypothesized that there was general satisfaction with these arm ports and they have a minimal negative impact on quality of life. In this study we aimed to assess our hypotheses. METHODS: We surveyed subjects, who having previously received an arm port for chemotherapy to treat a malignancy, attended the interventional room for its removal. The survey assessed the port's effect on lifestyle, the degree of device-related pain, the acceptance of the port, and the willingness to have another port in the future. RESULTS: Survey responses from 77 subjects were reviewed. On a scale of 1 (most negative) to 10 (most positive), respondents indicated that the port system was a very positive enhancement to their treatment (satisfaction = 9.2 ± 2.0 and positivity = 8.8 ± 2.2). The port had little impact on daily activities. The mean score for the likelihood of choosing to have another port placed if additional treatment was required was 9.1 ± 2.1. DISCUSSION: The arm port in this study did not negatively impact subject satisfaction and quality of life for this cohort. Most subjects rated the device utility highly and felt that the port was a positive enhancement to their treatment, one that they would possibly utilise again in future, if need be.
Authors: Dhurata Ivziku; Raffaella Gualandi; Francesca Pesce; Anna De Benedictis; Daniela Tartaglini Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-01-14 Impact factor: 3.603