E Longhurst1, E S Dylke1, S L Kilbreath2. 1. Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, PO Box 170, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia. 2. Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, PO Box 170, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia. Sharon.kilbreath@sydney.edu.au.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This aim of this study was to determine the use of compression garments by women with lymphoedema secondary to breast cancer treatment and factors which underpin use. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to the Survey and Review group of the Breast Cancer Network Australia. The survey included questions related to the participants' demographics, breast cancer and lymphoedema medical history, prescription and use of compression garments and their beliefs about compression and lymphoedema. Data were analysed using principal component analysis and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Compression garments had been prescribed to 83% of 201 women with lymphoedema within the last 5 years, although 37 women had discontinued their use. Even when accounting for severity of swelling, type of garment(s) and advice given for use varied across participants. Use of compression garments was driven by women's beliefs that they were vulnerable to progression of their disease and that compression would prevent its worsening. Common reasons given as to why women had discontinued their use included discomfort, and their lymphoedema was stable. Participant characteristics associated with discontinuance of compression garments included their belief that (i) the garments were not effective in managing their condition, (ii) experienced mild-moderate swelling and/or (iii) had experienced swelling for greater than 5 years. CONCLUSION: The prescription of compression garments for lymphoedema is highly varied and may be due to lack of underpinning evidence to inform treatment.
PURPOSE: This aim of this study was to determine the use of compression garments by women with lymphoedema secondary to breast cancer treatment and factors which underpin use. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to the Survey and Review group of the Breast Cancer Network Australia. The survey included questions related to the participants' demographics, breast cancer and lymphoedema medical history, prescription and use of compression garments and their beliefs about compression and lymphoedema. Data were analysed using principal component analysis and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Compression garments had been prescribed to 83% of 201 women with lymphoedema within the last 5 years, although 37 women had discontinued their use. Even when accounting for severity of swelling, type of garment(s) and advice given for use varied across participants. Use of compression garments was driven by women's beliefs that they were vulnerable to progression of their disease and that compression would prevent its worsening. Common reasons given as to why women had discontinued their use included discomfort, and their lymphoedema was stable. Participant characteristics associated with discontinuance of compression garments included their belief that (i) the garments were not effective in managing their condition, (ii) experienced mild-moderate swelling and/or (iii) had experienced swelling for greater than 5 years. CONCLUSION: The prescription of compression garments for lymphoedema is highly varied and may be due to lack of underpinning evidence to inform treatment.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adherence; Breast cancer; Compression garments; Lymphedema; Protection motivation theory
Authors: Jeanette Ezzo; Eric Manheimer; Margaret L McNeely; Doris M Howell; Robert Weiss; Karin I Johansson; Ting Bao; Linda Bily; Catherine M Tuppo; Anne F Williams; Didem Karadibak Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2015-05-21
Authors: Heather Tulloch; Robert Reida; Monika Slovinec D'Angeloa; Ronald C Plotnikoff; Louise Morrina; Louise Beatona; Sophia Papadakisa; Andrew Pipe Journal: Psychol Health Date: 2009-03
Authors: Ian S Dayes; Tim J Whelan; Jim A Julian; Sameer Parpia; Kathleen I Pritchard; David Paul D'Souza; Lyn Kligman; Donna Reise; Linda LeBlanc; Margaret L McNeely; Lee Manchul; Jennifer Wiernikowski; Mark N Levine Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-09-16 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nicole L Stout Gergich; Lucinda A Pfalzer; Charles McGarvey; Barbara Springer; Lynn H Gerber; Peter Soballe Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-06-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: María Nieves Muñoz-Alcaraz; Antonio José Jiménez-Vílchez; Mirian Santamaría-Peláez; Luis A Pérula-de Torres; María Victoria Olmo-Carmona; María Teresa Muñoz-García; Presentación Jorge-Gutiérrez; Jesús Serrano-Merino; Esperanza Romero-Rodríguez; Lorena Rodríguez-Elena; Raquel Refusta-Ainaga; María Pilar Lahoz-Sánchez; Belén Miró-Palacios; Mayra Medrano-Cid; Rosa Magallón-Botaya; Luis A Mínguez-Mínguez; Josefa González-Santos; Jerónimo J González-Bernal Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-04-16 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: María Nieves Muñoz-Alcaraz; Luis Ángel Pérula-de-Torres; Jesús Serrano-Merino; Antonio José Jiménez-Vílchez; María Victoria Olmo-Carmona; María Teresa Muñoz-García; Cruz Bartolomé-Moreno; Bárbara Oliván-Blázquez; Rosa Magallón-Botaya Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2020-11-09 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: María Nieves Muñoz-Alcaraz; Luis A Pérula-de Torres; Antonio José Jiménez-Vílchez; Paula Rodríguez-Fernández; María Victoria Olmo-Carmona; María Teresa Muñoz-García; Presentación Jorge-Gutiérrez; Jesús Serrano-Merino; Esperanza Romero-Rodríguez; Lorena Rodríguez-Elena; Raquel Refusta-Ainaga; María Pilar Lahoz-Sánchez; Belén Miró-Palacios; Mayra Medrano-Cid; Rosa Magallón-Botaya; Mirian Santamaría-Peláez; Luis A Mínguez-Mínguez; Jerónimo J González-Bernal Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-03-28 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Khairunnisa' Md Yusof; Kira Groen; Rozita Rosli; Maha Abdullah; Rozi Mahmud; Kelly A Avery-Kiejda Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-09-26 Impact factor: 6.208