Head & neck · 2017
Usability of advanced pneumatic compression to treat cancer-related head and neck lymphedema: A feasibility study.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Mayrovitz Harvey N, Ryan Shelly, Hartman James M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This functional usability study assessed ease of use, fit, comfort, and potential clinical benefits of advanced pneumatic compression treatment of cancer-related head and neck lymphedema.
METHODS: Patient-reported comfort and other treatment aspects were evaluated and multiple face and neck measurements were obtained on 44 patients with head and neck lymphedema before and after 1 treatment session to assess usability and treatment-related lymphedema changes.
RESULTS: A majority of the patients (82%) reported the treatment was comfortable; most patients (61%) reported feeling better after treatment, and 93% reported that they would be likely to use this therapy at home. One treatment produced overall small but highly statistically significant reductions in composite metrics (mean ± SD) of the face (82.5 ± 4.3 cm vs 80.9 ± 4.1 cm; P < .001) and neck (120.4 ± 12.2 cm vs 119.2 ± 12.1 cm; P < .001) with no adverse events.
CONCLUSION: Results found the treatment to be safe, easy to use, and well tolerated while demonstrating edema reduction after a single initial treatment.
METHODS: Patient-reported comfort and other treatment aspects were evaluated and multiple face and neck measurements were obtained on 44 patients with head and neck lymphedema before and after 1 treatment session to assess usability and treatment-related lymphedema changes.
RESULTS: A majority of the patients (82%) reported the treatment was comfortable; most patients (61%) reported feeling better after treatment, and 93% reported that they would be likely to use this therapy at home. One treatment produced overall small but highly statistically significant reductions in composite metrics (mean ± SD) of the face (82.5 ± 4.3 cm vs 80.9 ± 4.1 cm; P < .001) and neck (120.4 ± 12.2 cm vs 119.2 ± 12.1 cm; P < .001) with no adverse events.
CONCLUSION: Results found the treatment to be safe, easy to use, and well tolerated while demonstrating edema reduction after a single initial treatment.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedFeasibility StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansIntermittent Pneumatic Compression DevicesLymphedemaMaleMassageMiddle AgedNeck DissectionPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPatient SatisfactionPostoperative CarePostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesRecovery of FunctionRisk AssessmentTreatment Outcome