A physiotherapists perspective of a geriatric clinic in a tertiary oncology centre.

IF 1.2 Q4 ONCOLOGY
ecancermedicalscience Pub Date : 2024-09-20 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3332/ecancer.2024.1774
Ankita Chitre, Akhil Kapoor, Bipinesh Sansar, Anuj Gupta, Praveen Lakshmanamurthy, Somnath Dey, Kunal Vinayak, Ajit Sahoo, Navneet Kaur, Sumaiya Azeem, Dipti Kadu, Akash Anand Shrivastav
{"title":"A physiotherapists perspective of a geriatric clinic in a tertiary oncology centre.","authors":"Ankita Chitre, Akhil Kapoor, Bipinesh Sansar, Anuj Gupta, Praveen Lakshmanamurthy, Somnath Dey, Kunal Vinayak, Ajit Sahoo, Navneet Kaur, Sumaiya Azeem, Dipti Kadu, Akash Anand Shrivastav","doi":"10.3332/ecancer.2024.1774","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims and objectives: </strong>To analyse various domains amongst the geriatric population such as age, gender, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, type of cancer and use of assistive devices, and find a correlation between the outcome measures such as short physical performance battery (SPPB) and performance-oriented mobility assessment (POMA).</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>Patients above 60 years were screened and further referred to the physiotherapy department. A brief history was recorded to retrieve the demographic data such as name, age, gender, height, weight, BMI, hand dominance, diagnosis, previous investigations are done, comorbidities if any present, use of assistive devices if required and in case any previous oncological treatment has been delivered. Various outcome measures were administered such as POMA, SPPB, 6 minutes walk test (6 MWT) and numerical rating for fatigue. The interpretations were noted on a case report sheet and the appropriate interventions for the deficits were delivered to the patient. Also, the patients were asked to carry on the necessary investigation (if required) and get back to the physiotherapy OPD. No follow-up is required by the patients as this was a retrospective single-endpoint study.</p><p><strong>Results and analysis: </strong>The descriptive analysis was done by using R software (version 4.2.3). The main objective was to analyse the variables descriptively using numbers and percentages. The correlation between 2 outcome measures: SPPB and POMA was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation.All the 100 patients had solid tumour malignancies, commonly GI (37%), thoracic (18%), breast (17%), H and N (13%), uro-oncology (11%) and gynecology (4%). The median age was 70 years (range, 60-88). The median BMI was 22.10 (IQR, 19.40-24.77). Among 100 patients, comorbidities were found in most of the patients, most commonly hypertension (35%), diabetes mellitus (20%), heart disease (9%) and other diseases (8%). Out of 100 patients, 15% of them used assistive devices but the remaining 85% of patients did not require any assistive devices. Different outcome measures were also assessed for understanding the patients' risk in different categories. On assessing POMA, most of the patients had a medium risk of fall (49%), followed by high risk (31%) and low risk (14%). On assessing SPPB, most of the patients had low risk (41%), followed by medium risk (31%) and high risk (28%). The aerobic capacity of patients was assessed using 6 MWT (walking capacity) which showed that most of them had a severe reduction in aerobic capacity (37%) followed by moderation reduction (28%), good aerobic capacity (25%) and mild reduction (10%). The treatment required by the patients involved most commonly LL strengthening (71; 30.6%) and aerobic conditioning (67; 28.9%) and the least was brisk walking (4; 1.72%) and UL strengthening (2; 0.86%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Commonly deranged domains included fatigue (97%), risk of fall (80%)<b>,</b> reduced aerobic capacity (75%) and comorbidities (73%). The correlation between SPPB and POMA was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation method which obtained a correlation coefficient of 0.79 which implies that there is a strong positive association between SPPB and POMA.</p>","PeriodicalId":11460,"journal":{"name":"ecancermedicalscience","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11489089/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ecancermedicalscience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2024.1774","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims and objectives: To analyse various domains amongst the geriatric population such as age, gender, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, type of cancer and use of assistive devices, and find a correlation between the outcome measures such as short physical performance battery (SPPB) and performance-oriented mobility assessment (POMA).

Methodology: Patients above 60 years were screened and further referred to the physiotherapy department. A brief history was recorded to retrieve the demographic data such as name, age, gender, height, weight, BMI, hand dominance, diagnosis, previous investigations are done, comorbidities if any present, use of assistive devices if required and in case any previous oncological treatment has been delivered. Various outcome measures were administered such as POMA, SPPB, 6 minutes walk test (6 MWT) and numerical rating for fatigue. The interpretations were noted on a case report sheet and the appropriate interventions for the deficits were delivered to the patient. Also, the patients were asked to carry on the necessary investigation (if required) and get back to the physiotherapy OPD. No follow-up is required by the patients as this was a retrospective single-endpoint study.

Results and analysis: The descriptive analysis was done by using R software (version 4.2.3). The main objective was to analyse the variables descriptively using numbers and percentages. The correlation between 2 outcome measures: SPPB and POMA was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation.All the 100 patients had solid tumour malignancies, commonly GI (37%), thoracic (18%), breast (17%), H and N (13%), uro-oncology (11%) and gynecology (4%). The median age was 70 years (range, 60-88). The median BMI was 22.10 (IQR, 19.40-24.77). Among 100 patients, comorbidities were found in most of the patients, most commonly hypertension (35%), diabetes mellitus (20%), heart disease (9%) and other diseases (8%). Out of 100 patients, 15% of them used assistive devices but the remaining 85% of patients did not require any assistive devices. Different outcome measures were also assessed for understanding the patients' risk in different categories. On assessing POMA, most of the patients had a medium risk of fall (49%), followed by high risk (31%) and low risk (14%). On assessing SPPB, most of the patients had low risk (41%), followed by medium risk (31%) and high risk (28%). The aerobic capacity of patients was assessed using 6 MWT (walking capacity) which showed that most of them had a severe reduction in aerobic capacity (37%) followed by moderation reduction (28%), good aerobic capacity (25%) and mild reduction (10%). The treatment required by the patients involved most commonly LL strengthening (71; 30.6%) and aerobic conditioning (67; 28.9%) and the least was brisk walking (4; 1.72%) and UL strengthening (2; 0.86%).

Conclusion: Commonly deranged domains included fatigue (97%), risk of fall (80%), reduced aerobic capacity (75%) and comorbidities (73%). The correlation between SPPB and POMA was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation method which obtained a correlation coefficient of 0.79 which implies that there is a strong positive association between SPPB and POMA.

物理治疗师对三级肿瘤中心老年病诊所的看法。
目的和目标分析老年患者的年龄、性别、体重指数(BMI)、合并症、癌症类型和辅助设备使用情况等各方面因素,并找出短期体能测试(SPPB)和以表现为导向的行动能力评估(POMA)等结果测量之间的相关性:方法:对 60 岁以上的患者进行筛查,并进一步转诊至物理治疗部门。记录简短病史以检索人口统计学数据,如姓名、年龄、性别、身高、体重、体重指数(BMI)、手部优势、诊断、既往检查、合并症(如有)、辅助设备(如有)的使用情况以及既往是否接受过肿瘤治疗。对患者进行了各种结果测量,如 POMA、SPPB、6 分钟步行测试(6 MWT)和疲劳度数字评级。在病例报告单上记录解释结果,并针对患者的缺陷采取适当的干预措施。此外,还要求患者继续进行必要的检查(如有需要),并返回物理治疗手术室。由于这是一项回顾性单终点研究,因此患者无需进行随访:使用 R 软件(4.2.3 版)进行了描述性分析。主要目的是使用数字和百分比对变量进行描述性分析。两个结果指标之间的相关性:所有 100 名患者均为实体瘤恶性肿瘤,常见的有消化系统肿瘤(37%)、胸部肿瘤(18%)、乳腺肿瘤(17%)、甲状腺肿瘤(13%)、泌尿肿瘤(11%)和妇科肿瘤(4%)。年龄中位数为 70 岁(60-88 岁不等)。体重指数中位数为 22.10(IQR,19.40-24.77)。在 100 名患者中,大多数患者都有合并症,最常见的是高血压(35%)、糖尿病(20%)、心脏病(9%)和其他疾病(8%)。在 100 名患者中,15% 的患者使用辅助设备,其余 85% 的患者不需要任何辅助设备。为了解不同类别患者的风险,还对不同的结果指标进行了评估。在评估跌倒风险时,大多数患者的跌倒风险为中度(49%),其次是高风险(31%)和低风险(14%)。在评估 SPPB 时,大多数患者有低风险(41%),其次是中风险(31%)和高风险(28%)。使用 6 MWT(步行能力)对患者的有氧能力进行了评估,结果显示大多数患者的有氧能力严重下降(37%),其次是中度下降(28%)、良好(25%)和轻度下降(10%)。患者需要的治疗最常见的是 LL 强化(71;30.6%)和有氧调节(67;28.9%),最少的是快走(4;1.72%)和 UL 强化(2;0.86%):常见的失常领域包括疲劳(97%)、跌倒风险(80%)、有氧运动能力下降(75%)和合并症(73%)。使用斯皮尔曼等级相关法评估了 SPPB 和 POMA 之间的相关性,相关系数为 0.79,这意味着 SPPB 和 POMA 之间存在很强的正相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.60%
发文量
138
审稿时长
27 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信