Access to Physical Rehabilitation for a Range of Adverse Physical Effects Following Different Types of Breast Cancer Surgery

IF 1 Q4 ONCOLOGY
D. McGhee, J. Steele
{"title":"Access to Physical Rehabilitation for a Range of Adverse Physical Effects Following Different Types of Breast Cancer Surgery","authors":"D. McGhee, J. Steele","doi":"10.1097/01.REO.0000000000000297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: To investigate the access to physical rehabilitation for a range of adverse physical effects following different types of breast cancer surgery. Methods: Online survey of 632 Australian women (mean age = 59.8 years, SD = 9.6) grouped according to their breast cancer surgery, (i) breast-conserving surgery (BCS; n = 228), (ii) mastectomy (MAST; n = 208), (iii) breast reconstruction (BRS; n = 196), who retrospectively reported whether they received any physical rehabilitation for 6 adverse physical effects. Fisher's exact tests were used to compare the frequency of respondents who received physical rehabilitation for each adverse physical effect among the 3 groups. The percentage of the entire cohort of respondents (n = 632) who had lymph nodes removed, postoperative complications, or preexisting musculoskeletal issues who received physical rehabilitation was also tabulated. Results: No significant difference was found among the 3 groups in the percentage of respondents who received physical rehabilitation for most adverse physical effects (scar: P = .27; shoulder: P = .11; torso: P = .76; physical discomfort disturbing sleep: P = .74), except lymphedema (P = .001) and breast support issues (P = .01), which were significantly less for the BRS and BCS groups. Less than 50% of respondents following all types of breast cancer surgery received physical rehabilitation for issues associated with scars, the torso, and physical discomfort disturbing sleep, whereas more than 70% received physical rehabilitation for shoulder issues and lymphedema. Conclusion: Access to physical rehabilitation was similar following the different types of breast cancer surgery; however, gaps were identified for adverse physical effects associated with scars, torso, and physical discomfort disturbing sleep, where access was less than that for shoulder issues and lymphedema.","PeriodicalId":54153,"journal":{"name":"Rehabilitation Oncology","volume":"63 1","pages":"116 - 124"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rehabilitation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/01.REO.0000000000000297","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the access to physical rehabilitation for a range of adverse physical effects following different types of breast cancer surgery. Methods: Online survey of 632 Australian women (mean age = 59.8 years, SD = 9.6) grouped according to their breast cancer surgery, (i) breast-conserving surgery (BCS; n = 228), (ii) mastectomy (MAST; n = 208), (iii) breast reconstruction (BRS; n = 196), who retrospectively reported whether they received any physical rehabilitation for 6 adverse physical effects. Fisher's exact tests were used to compare the frequency of respondents who received physical rehabilitation for each adverse physical effect among the 3 groups. The percentage of the entire cohort of respondents (n = 632) who had lymph nodes removed, postoperative complications, or preexisting musculoskeletal issues who received physical rehabilitation was also tabulated. Results: No significant difference was found among the 3 groups in the percentage of respondents who received physical rehabilitation for most adverse physical effects (scar: P = .27; shoulder: P = .11; torso: P = .76; physical discomfort disturbing sleep: P = .74), except lymphedema (P = .001) and breast support issues (P = .01), which were significantly less for the BRS and BCS groups. Less than 50% of respondents following all types of breast cancer surgery received physical rehabilitation for issues associated with scars, the torso, and physical discomfort disturbing sleep, whereas more than 70% received physical rehabilitation for shoulder issues and lymphedema. Conclusion: Access to physical rehabilitation was similar following the different types of breast cancer surgery; however, gaps were identified for adverse physical effects associated with scars, torso, and physical discomfort disturbing sleep, where access was less than that for shoulder issues and lymphedema.
不同类型乳腺癌手术后一系列不良生理影响的物理康复途径
目的:探讨不同类型乳腺癌手术后的一系列不良生理反应的物理康复途径。方法:对632名澳大利亚女性(平均年龄59.8岁,SD = 9.6)进行在线调查,根据乳腺癌手术进行分组,(1)保乳手术(BCS;n = 228), (ii)乳房切除术(MAST;n = 208), (iii)乳房重建(BRS;N = 196),回顾性报告6例不良生理反应患者是否接受过物理康复治疗。采用Fisher精确检验比较三组患者接受物理康复治疗的频率。整个队列调查对象(n = 632)中淋巴结切除、术后并发症或先前存在的肌肉骨骼问题接受物理康复的百分比也被制成表格。结果:三组间接受肢体康复治疗最不良生理反应的比例差异无统计学意义(瘢痕:P = 0.27;肩部:P = 0.11;躯干:P = 0.76;身体不适影响睡眠:P = 0.74),淋巴水肿(P = 0.001)和乳房支撑问题(P = 0.01)除外,BRS组和BCS组的症状显著减少。在所有类型的乳腺癌手术后,不到50%的受访者接受了与疤痕、躯干和影响睡眠的身体不适相关的物理康复,而超过70%的受访者接受了肩部问题和淋巴水肿的物理康复。结论:不同类型乳腺癌手术后患者获得物理康复的机会相似;然而,与疤痕、躯干和影响睡眠的身体不适相关的不良身体影响被确定为空白,而肩部问题和淋巴水肿的接触较少。
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
1.70
自引率
22.20%
发文量
48
×
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