Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
A pragmatic evaluation of community-based lymphoedema services for individuals at risk of, or living with, cancer-related lymphoedema.
СтатьяPragmatic Clinical TrialНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cantwell Mairéad, Skelly Fiona, Sheehan Patricia, O Brien Michael, Kehoe Bróna, Moyna Niall, McCarren Andrew, Thomas Dorothy, O'Loughlin Bernie, Mullen Louise
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study examined the long-term effects of standard care lymphoedema treatment, delivered by cancer support centres in community-based settings, on quality of life and self-reported symptom severity among individuals with cancer-related lymphoedema (CRL).
METHODS: A single-group pre-post pragmatic study design was adopted. Survivors of cancer referred to community-based cancer support centres were recruited. Participants received a minimum of 3 standard care lymphoedema treatment sessions at the centres with a certified lymphoedema clinician at baseline (T1), 1 month (T2) and 6 months (T3), where core treatment strategies included lymphoedema education to enable self-management, skin care and weight management. Assessments of quality of life and symptom severity were conducted at each visit using limb specific versions of the Lymphoedema Quality of Life (LYMQoL) questionnaire (i.e. arm LYMQoL, leg LYMQoL) as applicable for each person, and a researcher-developed tool of self-reported symptom severity.
RESULTS: One-hundred and twenty survivors of cancer were recruited (mean age (± SD) 59 (± 12y); 90% female). Forty participants (33%) completed the T3 assessment. Linear mixed-model analyses demonstrated significant improvements in arm-CRL QoL (n = 78) and leg-CRL QoL (n = 18) from T1 to T3 (p < 0.05), with small (Cohen's d = 0.24) and large (Cohen's d = 0.85) effect sizes respectively. All 7 self-reported symptom ratings, including pain, swelling and functional restriction, improved from T1-T3.
CONCLUSION: Standard care lymphoedema treatment, when delivered in community-based cancer support centres, was associated with improvements in QoL and self-reported symptoms among survivors of cancer with arm and leg lymphoedema at 6 months.
METHODS: A single-group pre-post pragmatic study design was adopted. Survivors of cancer referred to community-based cancer support centres were recruited. Participants received a minimum of 3 standard care lymphoedema treatment sessions at the centres with a certified lymphoedema clinician at baseline (T1), 1 month (T2) and 6 months (T3), where core treatment strategies included lymphoedema education to enable self-management, skin care and weight management. Assessments of quality of life and symptom severity were conducted at each visit using limb specific versions of the Lymphoedema Quality of Life (LYMQoL) questionnaire (i.e. arm LYMQoL, leg LYMQoL) as applicable for each person, and a researcher-developed tool of self-reported symptom severity.
RESULTS: One-hundred and twenty survivors of cancer were recruited (mean age (± SD) 59 (± 12y); 90% female). Forty participants (33%) completed the T3 assessment. Linear mixed-model analyses demonstrated significant improvements in arm-CRL QoL (n = 78) and leg-CRL QoL (n = 18) from T1 to T3 (p < 0.05), with small (Cohen's d = 0.24) and large (Cohen's d = 0.85) effect sizes respectively. All 7 self-reported symptom ratings, including pain, swelling and functional restriction, improved from T1-T3.
CONCLUSION: Standard care lymphoedema treatment, when delivered in community-based cancer support centres, was associated with improvements in QoL and self-reported symptoms among survivors of cancer with arm and leg lymphoedema at 6 months.