Bergmann, A., da Costa Leite Ferreira, M.G., de Aguiar, S.S., de Almeida Dias, R., de Souza Abrahao, K., Paltrinieri, E.M., . . . Andrade, M.F. (2014). Physiotherapy in upper limb lymphedema after breast cancer treatment: A randomized study. Lymphology, 47, 82–91.

Study Purpose

To compare the effects of physical treatment with and without manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) on lymphedema in breast cancer survivors after lymphadenectomy

Intervention Characteristics/Basic Study Process

Patients were randomized into three groups. Group 1 received MLD, skin care, bandaging, and remedial exercises. Group 2 received soft touch (a sliding touch on chest and upper limbs), skin care, bandaging, and remedial exercises. Group 3 received skin care, bandaging, and remedial exercises. Groups 2 and 3 were combined after an initial analysis revealed no differences, and additional patients were randomized into the two groups. A physiotherapist trained in lymphedema therapy administered treatments three times per week to all patients in two phases. In phase 1, all patients received skin care, compressive bandaging, and remedial exercises, and group 1 received 30 minutes of MLD using the Vodder technique while group 2 did not receive any MLD. When arm volume plateaued for one week, patients from both groups moved to phase 2, which consisted of skin care, exercises, and fitted garments. Volume was assessed at randomization, after each treatment session, and at each follow-up visit. For both groups, phase 1 lasted approximately 24 days.

Sample Characteristics

  • N = 57  
  • AVERAGE AGE = 62 years
  • FEMALES: 100%
  • KEY DISEASE CHARACTERISTICS: Breast cancer
  • OTHER KEY SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS: Most participants were overweight (body mass index mean = 29.75).

Setting

  • SITE: Single-site    
  • SETTING TYPE: Outpatient    
  • LOCATION: Brazil

Phase of Care and Clinical Applications

  • PHASE OF CARE: Late effects and survivorship

Study Design

Randomized, controlled trial

Measurement Instruments/Methods

  • Volume was measured using the truncated cone formula with circumferences at 7, 14, and 21 cm under and 7 and 14 cm above the cubital fold
  • Volume excess
  • Absolute volume excess

Results

Patients in group 1 completed phase 1 in an average of 21.54 days, and patients in group 2 completed it in an average of 27.34 days. A significant reduction in limb volume was seen during phase I for both groups (p < .001), but no difference was seen between the groups. Patients in groups 1 and 2 had an average volume excess reduction of 15.02%. In both groups, 73.7% of participants reported subjective feelings of improvement in swelling.

Conclusions

The results of this study do not support the addition of MLD to treatment protocols for lymphedema after breast cancer. Patients in both groups of this study showed a statistically significant reduction in total arm volume after phase 1, and there were no differences in arm volume reduction between groups. Patients in group 1 did complete phase 1 in fewer days than patients in group 2.

Limitations

  • Small sample (< 100)
  • Risk of bias (no blinding)

 

Nursing Implications

This study does not support the use of MLD to treat lymphedema in breast cancer survivors after lymphadenectomy. Nurses should regularly assess patients who have completed breast cancer treatment for lymphedema and should provide appropriate referrals for treatment, give education about completing exercises at home, advise patients about wearing compression garments, and explain how to properly conduct skin care for a limb affected by lymphedema.