Assessment of breast cancer-related arm lymphedema: comparison of physical measurement methods and self-report

S. A. Czerniec; L. C. Ward; K. M. Refshauge; J. Beith; M. J. Lee; S. York; S. L. Kilbreath

doi:10.3109/07357900902918494

Assessment of breast cancer-related arm lymphedema: comparison of physical measurement methods and self-report

S. A. Czerniec, L. C. Ward, K. M. Refshauge, J. Beith, M. J. Lee, S. York, S. L. Kilbreath

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

187 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the relationship between physical methods of measuring lymphedema and self-reported swelling, their reliability, and standard error of measurement. Method: Lymphedema in each arm of women with (n = 33) and without (n = 18) unilateral arm lymphedema, secondary to breast cancer was measured by self-report, bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS), perometer, and the truncated cone method. Results: The physical measurement tools were highly reliable (ICC _(2,1): 0.94 to 1.00) with high concordance (r_c: 0.89 to 0.99). Self-report correlated moderately with physical measurements (r = 0.65 to 0.71) and was moderately reliable (ICC_(2,1): 0.70). Conclusions: Lymphedema assessment methods are concordant and reliable but not interchangeable.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	54-62
Number of pages	9
Journal	Cancer Investigation
Volume	28
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3109/07357900902918494
Publication status	Published - 1 Jan 2010
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

Bioimpedance spectroscopy
Limb circumference
Perometer
Reliability

Access to Document

10.3109/07357900902918494

Cite this

@article{1fe6952454d14bf9a4fb1e6db283b6ae,

title = "Assessment of breast cancer-related arm lymphedema: comparison of physical measurement methods and self-report",

abstract = "Purpose: To determine the relationship between physical methods of measuring lymphedema and self-reported swelling, their reliability, and standard error of measurement. Method: Lymphedema in each arm of women with (n = 33) and without (n = 18) unilateral arm lymphedema, secondary to breast cancer was measured by self-report, bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS), perometer, and the truncated cone method. Results: The physical measurement tools were highly reliable (ICC (2,1): 0.94 to 1.00) with high concordance (rc: 0.89 to 0.99). Self-report correlated moderately with physical measurements (r = 0.65 to 0.71) and was moderately reliable (ICC(2,1): 0.70). Conclusions: Lymphedema assessment methods are concordant and reliable but not interchangeable.",

keywords = "Bioimpedance spectroscopy, Limb circumference, Perometer, Reliability",

author = "Czerniec, {S. A.} and Ward, {L. C.} and Refshauge, {K. M.} and J. Beith and Lee, {M. J.} and S. York and Kilbreath, {S. L.}",

year = "2010",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.3109/07357900902918494",

language = "English",

volume = "28",

pages = "54--62",

journal = "Cancer Investigation",

issn = "0735-7907",

publisher = "Informa Healthcare",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessment of breast cancer-related arm lymphedema

T2 - comparison of physical measurement methods and self-report

AU - Czerniec, S. A.

AU - Ward, L. C.

AU - Refshauge, K. M.

AU - Beith, J.

AU - Lee, M. J.

AU - York, S.

AU - Kilbreath, S. L.

PY - 2010/1/1

Y1 - 2010/1/1

N2 - Purpose: To determine the relationship between physical methods of measuring lymphedema and self-reported swelling, their reliability, and standard error of measurement. Method: Lymphedema in each arm of women with (n = 33) and without (n = 18) unilateral arm lymphedema, secondary to breast cancer was measured by self-report, bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS), perometer, and the truncated cone method. Results: The physical measurement tools were highly reliable (ICC (2,1): 0.94 to 1.00) with high concordance (rc: 0.89 to 0.99). Self-report correlated moderately with physical measurements (r = 0.65 to 0.71) and was moderately reliable (ICC(2,1): 0.70). Conclusions: Lymphedema assessment methods are concordant and reliable but not interchangeable.

AB - Purpose: To determine the relationship between physical methods of measuring lymphedema and self-reported swelling, their reliability, and standard error of measurement. Method: Lymphedema in each arm of women with (n = 33) and without (n = 18) unilateral arm lymphedema, secondary to breast cancer was measured by self-report, bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS), perometer, and the truncated cone method. Results: The physical measurement tools were highly reliable (ICC (2,1): 0.94 to 1.00) with high concordance (rc: 0.89 to 0.99). Self-report correlated moderately with physical measurements (r = 0.65 to 0.71) and was moderately reliable (ICC(2,1): 0.70). Conclusions: Lymphedema assessment methods are concordant and reliable but not interchangeable.

KW - Bioimpedance spectroscopy

KW - Limb circumference

KW - Perometer

KW - Reliability

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=72449146247&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3109/07357900902918494

DO - 10.3109/07357900902918494

M3 - Article

C2 - 19916749

AN - SCOPUS:72449146247

SN - 0735-7907

VL - 28

SP - 54

EP - 62

JO - Cancer Investigation

JF - Cancer Investigation

IS - 1

ER -

Assessment of breast cancer-related arm lymphedema: comparison of physical measurement methods and self-report

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this