Journal List > Asian Oncol Nurs > v.18(3) > 1109034

Lee, Chun, Noh, Song, Kim, and Ha: Development of Lower Extremity Lymphedema Nursing Practice Protocol for Patients Following Gynecologic Cancer Treatment

초록

Purpose

This study aimed to develop and evaluate the lower extremity lymphedema nursing practice protocol for patients following gynecologic cancer treatment.

Methods

Thirteen web-sites were searched for eligible clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and eleven databases were searched to identify evidence to develop a lower extremity lymphedema nursing practice protocol for patients following gynecologic cancer treatment.

Results

Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, eight CPGs and ninety-six studies, two guidelines and eight studies were identified as evidence. The protocol development group consisted of ten experts who have at least five years’ experience in the related area. A lower extremity lymphedema nursing practice protocol for patients following gynecologic cancer treatment was developed including forty-three recommendations in five domains. Significant differences were found in nurses’ pre and post knowledge and confidence on lower extremity lymphedema prevention and management.

Conclusion

Nurses and other professionals could utilize this evidence based lower extremity lymphedema nursing practice protocol and apply it to patients undergoing gynecologic cancer treatment.

REFERENCES

1. National Cancer Information Center (KR). Annual report of cancer statistics in Korea in 2014 [Internet]. Available from. http://www.cancer.go.kr/. [Accessed August 9, 2017].
2. Abu-Rustum NR, Alektiar K, Iasonos A, Lev G, Sonoda Y, Aghajanian C, et al. The incidence of symptomatic lower-extremity lymphedema following treatment of uterine corpus malignancies: a 12-year experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Gynecol Oncol. 2006; 103:714–8.
crossref
3. Kang SH, Hwang KH, Sim YJ, Jeong HJ, Lee TH, Kim SH. The prevalence and risk factors of lower limb lymphedema in the patients with gynecologic neoplasms. Korean J Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 52:815–20.
4. Warren AG, Brorson H, Borud LJ, Slavin SA. Lymphedema: a compre-hensive review. Ann Plast Surg. 2007; 59:464–72.
5. Yang HS, Lee K, Kim DS, Sim YJ, Jeong HJ, Kim GC, et al. The association of social support and quality of life in gynecological cancer related of lymphedema in a hospital: a pilot study. Korean J Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 54:355–60.
crossref
6. Kim C, Lee G, Kim D, Kim J, Kim J, Lee H, et al. Literature prospective lymphedema of physical therapy. J Korean Soc health Sci. 2014; 11:69–76.
7. Lee Y, Lim MC, Joo J, Park K, Lee S, Seo S, et al. Development and validation of the Korean version of the female sexual function index-6 (FSFI-6K). Yonsei Med J. 2014; 55:1442–6.
crossref
8. Kim MY, Hwang EK. Development and validation of a knowledge scale for lymphedema in patients with breast cancer. Korean J Rehabil Nurs. 2012; 15:117–25.
crossref
9. Ministry of Health & Welfare, Korean Academy of Medical Science. Adaptation process for developing Korean clinical practice guidelines [Internet]. Available from. http://www.guideline.or.kr/contents/index.php?code=148. [Accessed August 20, 2017].
10. Medical Education Partnership Ltd. Best practice for the management of lymphoedema: an international consensus [Internet]. Available from. http://www.woundsinternational.com/media/issues/210/files/con-tent_175.pdf. [Accessed August 20, 2017].
11. Korean Society of Lymphedema. Clinical practice guideline for lymph-edema following cancer treatment [Internet]. Available from. http://www.kslymph.or.kr/file/151204.pdf. [Accessed August 20, 2017].
12. The AGREE Research Trust. Appraisal of guidelines for research & evaluation II, AGREE II instrument [Internet]. Available from. http://www.agreetrust.org. [Accessed August 9, 2018].
13. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). SIGN 50, a guideline developer's handbook [Internet]. Available from. http://www.sign.ac.uk. [Accessed August 20, 2017].
14. Gu MO, Cho YA, Cho MS, Eun Y, Jeong JS, Jung IS, et al. Adaptation of intravenous infusion nursing practice guideline. J Korean Clin Nurs Res. 2013; 19:128–42.
15. Mermel LA, Allon M, Bouza E, Craven DE, Flynn P, O'Grady NP, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of intravascular catheter-related infection: 2009 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2009; 49:1–45.
crossref
16. Choi BR. RAM (RAND/UCLA appropriateness method) applied to decision making method. HIRA Policy Trends. 2010; 4:58–62.
17. Field MJ, Lohr KN. Clinical practice guidelines. Directions for a new program [Internet]. Available from. http://nap.edu/1626. [Accessed March 1, 2016].
18. Kim HS. Effects of the nursing process education program on critical thinking dispositions of the nursing students. J Korean Data Anal Soc. 2015; 17:561–74.
19. Cho YA, Eun Y, Gu MO, Kim KS, Kwak MK, Kim JH, et al. Development of oral care nursing practice guideline using the guideline adaptation process. J Korean Clin Nurs Res. 2015; 21:154–68.
20. Jeong IS, Park KH, Song BR, Sim KH, Han EJ, Hong EY, et al. Development of clinical practice guideline by adaptation: diabetic foot care. J Korean Clin Nurs Res. 2015; 21:196–206.
21. Cho YA, Gu MO, Eun Y, Kim KS, Lee SH, Yoon JH, et al. Nursing practice guideline for prevention of venous thromboembolism according to the guideline adaptation process. J Korean Clin Nurs Res. 2016; 22:118–31.

Fig. 1.
Database Search Flow Chart.
aon-18-143f1.tif
Table 1.
Guideline Appraisal Using AGREE Tool
Appraisal criteria No. of item Score (%)
Guideline #1 Guideline #2
Scope and purpose 3 92.4 93.1
Stakeholder involvement 3 84.0 84.7
Rigor of development 8 81.8 82.0
Clarity of presentation 3 93.8 92.4
Applicability 4 82.3 78.1
Editorial independence 2 68.8 75.0
Overall AGREE assessment   Acceptable (n=7) Acceptable after revision (n=1) Acceptable (n=7) Acceptable after revision (n=1)

AGREE= Appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation collaboration.

Table 2.
SIGN Classification of Reviewed Studies
No. Author Title Article Study design n Evidence level
3 Oremus M Diagnosis and treatment of secondary lymphedema. McMaster University Evidence- based Practice Center. 2010 SR 1++
4 Finnane A Review of evidence of lymphedema treatment effect. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 2015;94:483-98 SR 1++
5 Leyng EYL The management of secondary lower limb lymphoedema in cancer patients: systematic review Palliative Medicine 2015;29:112-9 SR 1+
6 Iuchi T Associations between the treatments and outcomes of patients with upper and lower lymphoedema in Japan: a cross- sectional observational study. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 2015;52:913-9 Cohort study y 2-
7 Kerchner K Lower extremity lymphedema update: pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment guidelines American Academy of Dermatol- ogy. 2008;59:324-31 Journal Review  
8 National Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre The management of Secondary lymphoe dema: a guide for health professionals. National Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre. 2008 Journal Review  
9 National Lymphedema Network Position statement of the national lymph- edema network. National Lymphedema Network. 2011 Journal Review  
10 Marrs J Lymphedema and implications for oncol ogy nursing practice. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing. 2007;11:19-21 − Journal Review  

SIGN=Scottish Intercollegiate Guidlines Network.

Table 3.
Protocol Contents, Strength and Level of Recommendation
Protocol contents n (%) Recommendation strength/level
    I/A II/B III/C
I. Preventive care-assessment 2 (4.7)      
I-1. Assess lymphedema for potential patients and assess patient and caregiver's perception and knowledge on potential risk of lymphedema 1     1/1
 I-2. Assess patient's awareness on sign and symptom of lymphedema 1     1/1
II. Preventive care-intervention 6 (13.9)      
 II-1. Recognize importance of providing information, early detection and treatment 1     1/1
 II-2. Lower extremity lymphedema self-assessment education 1   1/1  
 II-3. Self-management method education 1   1/1  
 II-4. Recommend wearing therapeutic compression stocking 1   1/ /1
 II-5. Provide contact information of institution and clinic 1     1/1
 II-6. Report to physician and follow-up referral 1     1/1
III. Preventive care and lymphedema management-evaluation 3 (7.0)      
 III-1. Evaluate level of understanding on lymphedema preventive care education for potential patient and caregiver 1     1/1
 III-2. Evaluate patient's compliance on lymphedema risk reduction care instruction 1     1/1
 III-3. Evaluate pre post operative lymphedema care and follow-up care instruction 1     1/1
IV. Lower extremity lymphedema management-assessment 7 (16.3)      
 IV-1. Lymphedema assessment 1     1/1
 IV-2. Skin assessment 1     1/1
 IV-3. Measure lymphedema site circumference 1     1/1
 IV-4. Pain assessment 1     1/1
 IV-5. Nutrition assessment 1   1/ /1
 IV-6. Psychosocial status assessment 1     1/1
 IV-7. Mobility and functionality assessment 1     1/1
V. Lower extremity lymphedema management-intervention 2 25 (58.1)      
 V-1. Early and active involvement of patient and family 1     1/1
 V-2. Multi desciplinary approach, consultation to lymphedema clinic 1     1/1
 V-3. Complete decongestive therapy (CDT) 1 1/1    
 V-4. Exercise 1 1/1    
 V-5. Ambulation and activity 1 1/ /1  
 V-6. Sleep 1     1/1
 V-7. Skin care 4   2/1 2/3
 V-8. Lymph massage 4 1/1   3/3
 V-9. Intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) 1     1/1
 V-10. Multi-layer inelastic lymphedema bandaging (MLLB) 2 1/1   1/1
 V-11. Compression-therapeutic compression stocking 3     3/3
 V-12. Psychosocial Management 1     1/1
 V-13. Midline lymphedema management 1     1/1
 V-14. Lymphedema management for palliative patient 1     1/1
 V-15. Drug treatment 2   1/ 1/2
Total 43 (100.0) 5/4 7/4 31/35
Table 4.
Effect of Nurses’ Knowledge and Confidence on Lymphedema Prevention and Management for Patients after Gynecologic Cancer Treatment
Variables Pre
Post
t p
M ± SD M ± SD
Knowledge on lymphedema prevention and management 26.70 ± 2.77 33.42 ± 3.62 −9.52 <.001
Confidence on lymphedema prevention and management 2.84 ± 0.56 3.65 ± 0.56 −7.68 <.001
TOOLS
Similar articles