Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35776187›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2022

Community-based outpatient cancer rehabilitation services for women with gynecologic cancer: acceptability and impact on patient-reported outcomes.

Kelley C Wood, Jessica Bertram, Tiffany Kendig, Mary Hidde, Aliza Leiser, Alexandre Buckley de Meritens, Mackenzi Pergolotti

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kelley C WoodSelect Medical, ReVital Cancer Rehabilitation, 4714 Gettysburg Rd, Mechanicsburg, PA, 17055, USA. kecwood@selectmedical.com.
Jessica BertramBaylor Scott and White Institute for Rehabilitation, Dallas, TX, USA.
Tiffany KendigSelect Medical, ReVital Cancer Rehabilitation, 4714 Gettysburg Rd, Mechanicsburg, PA, 17055, USA.
Mary HiddeSelect Medical, ReVital Cancer Rehabilitation, 4714 Gettysburg Rd, Mechanicsburg, PA, 17055, USA.
Aliza LeiserDivision Gynecologic Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NB, USA.
Alexandre Buckley de MeritensDivision Gynecologic Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NB, USA.
Mackenzi PergolottiSelect Medical, ReVital Cancer Rehabilitation, 4714 Gettysburg Rd, Mechanicsburg, PA, 17055, USA.
Rutgers Cancer Institute of New JerseyBaylor Medical Center at Garland · USMedical College of Wisconsin · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWomen with gynecologic cancers often experience functional impairments impacting quality of life. Physical and occupational therapy (PT/OT) treat functional impairment; however, the acceptability and impact of these services for women with gynecologic cancer are unknown.

methodsWe reviewed rehabilitation charts of women with gynecologic cancer who received PT/OT (i.e., patients) in 2019 and completed patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) selected by their therapist at intake (pre) and discharge (post). We calculated descriptive statistics for patient, rehabilitation, and acceptability (0-10) data. For PROM data, we used paired samples t-tests to evaluate pre-post change, and then calculated effect size (Hedge's g) and the proportion who achieved a minimal detectable change (MDC).

resultsPT/OT patients (N = 84) were 64.63 ± 11.04 years old with predominant diagnoses of ovarian (41.7%) or endometrial (32.1%) cancer. They attended a median of 13 sessions (IQR = 8.0-19.0). Sessions were predominantly PT (86%) vs. OT (14%). Median acceptability was 10 (IQR = 9.8-10.0). Pre-post improvement was observed for each of the 17 PROMs used by therapists. Significant improvement (p < .05) was observed for four PROMs: the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (M∆ = 2.93 ± 2.31, g = 1.47, 71% achieved MDC), the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (M∆ = 12.88 ± 12.31, g = 0.61, 60% achieved MDC), the Lymphedema Life Impact Scale (M∆ = 20.50 ± 20.61, g = 1.18, 58% achieved MDC), and the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (M∆ = 6.55 ± 9.69, g = 0.33, 7% achieved MDC).

conclusionPT/OT was acceptable and improved patient-reported outcomes for women with gynecologic cancers. Future research is needed to establish gynecologic-specific guidelines for referral and PT/OT practice.

Indexed as

Genital Neoplasms, FemaleOccupational TherapyAgedCommunity Health ServicesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedOutpatientsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeHealth services evaluationNeoplasmsOccupational therapyPatient-reported outcome measuresPhysical therapyQuality of life

Identifiers

PMID35776187
OpenAlexW4283764048

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.