ArticleAnnals of rehabilitation medicine2019
Effects of Different Bandaging Methods for Treating Patients With Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema.
Article in Annals of rehabilitation medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Wrapping up the evidence: bandaging in breast cancer-related lymphedema-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2025Pooled it
- Evidence for the clinical effectiveness of decongestive lymphoedema treatment for breast cancer-related arm lymphoedema, a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Pooled it
- The effect of compression therapies and therapeutic modalities on lymphedema secondary to cancer: a rapid review and evidence map.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2024Review
- The effects of complex decongestive therapy on pain and functionality in individuals with breast cancer who developed adhesive capsulitis due to lymphedema: an evaluation by an isokinetic computerized system.The Korean journal of pain · 2022Article
- Recent Trends in Rehabilitation for Cancer Patients.Annals of rehabilitation medicine · 2022Article
- Efficient and precise Ultra-QuickDASH scale measuring lymphedema impact developed using computerized adaptive testing.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Adipose-derived regenerative cells and lipotransfer in alleviating breast cancer-related lymphedema: An open-label phase I trial with 4 years of follow-up.Stem cells translational medicine · 2021Article
- Features, Predictors, and Treatment of Breast Cancer-related Lymphedema.Current breast cancer reports · 2020Article
- Management of Lymphoedema and Lymphorrhoea with Wrap around Compression in Breast Secondary to Carcinoma Breast: A Case Report.Indian journal of palliative careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the treatment effects, satisfaction with the treatment, and performance improvement following bandage treatment using the spiral method and spica method for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL).
methodsA prospective study with 46 patients with BCRL was conducted. All patients were divided into either the spiral or spica group for non-elastic bandage therapy and received the same treatment for 2 weeks, apart from the group-specific bandaging method used. For both groups, the Quality of Life Instrument score before treatment, changes in the volume of lymphedema limb and the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score before and after treatment, and treatment satisfaction after treatment were compared. The Student t-test was used to compare the parameters between the two different bandage methods.
resultsWith respect to the treatment outcomes, total volume reduction and proximal part volume reduction after treatment were 98.0±158.3 mL and 56.0±65.4 mL in the spiral method group and 199.0±125.1 mL and 106.1±82.2 mL in the spica method group, respectively. Therefore, the spica method group showed a significantly better improvement (p<0.05). The DASH score changes after treatment showed that the spiral group score increased by 3.8±5.4 and the spica group score increased by 7.7±6.1; thus, a significantly better improvement was noted in the spica group (p<0.05).
conclusionThe spica method indicated better volume reduction and DASH score improvement than the spiral method. Therefore, the spica method may be more effective for treating patients with BCRL.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.