Comparison of Conventional Physiotherapy with Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy in Breast Cancer Patients with Lymph-Edema

  • Anuja Pasari Division of Physiotherapy, Department of Orthopaedics, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi-221005
Keywords: Lymphedema, PEMF Therapy, Breast cancer.

Abstract

Background: Lymphedema in addition to arm pain and movement restriction following breast cancer surgery is common challenge to physiotherapy. PEMF therapy is proving good adjunct for enhancing fracture healing, reducing inflammation and symptom relief. The same is exempt for benefit in stated problems of post-breast cancer surgery patients.

Methods: 60 patients each were sequentially enrolled following informed consent, administering either conventional physiotherapy or combined PEMF therapy with conventional physiotherapy for 3 weeks. The parameters examined were pain score, range of movement and arm circumference for edema.

Results: Physiotherapy benefited pain and range of movement but not lymphedema. PEMF combined therapy significantly reduced lymphedema in addition to other benefits.

Conclusions: PEMF therapy with reported bioenergetic effects appears to effect reduction of lymphedema as well as pain relief and betterment of joint movements. The study emphasizes need for establishing PEMF as adjunct root in therapy for the kind of patients. This would need larger and wider evaluation.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Ahmed RL, Prizment A, Lazavich D, Schmitz KH, Folsom AR. Lymphedema and quality of life in breast cancer survivors: the Iowa Women's Health Study. I Clin oncon 2008; 26 (December (35):5689-96.
2. Smoot B, Wong J, Cooper B, et al. Upper extremity impairments in Women with or without lymphedema following breast cancer treatment. J cancer surviv 2010; 4 (June (2):167-78.
3. Ridner SH. Quality of life and a symptom cluster associated with breast cancer treatment – related Lymphedema. Support care cancer 2005; 13 (November (11)):904-11,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/500520-005-0810-y.
4. Casley – Smith, IR, Alternations of untreated lymphedema and its grades over time, Lymphology 28 (1995), 174.
5. Disipio T, Rye S, Newman B, Hayer S. Incidence of Unilateral arm lymphedema after breast cancer :a systematic review and meta- analysis. The Lancet oncology 2013;14(6):500-15 [Pub med: 23540561].
6. Gan, JL, SL Li: Microwave heating in the management of Post mastectomy upper limb lymphedema. Ann plast surg 36 (1996), 576.
7. Mayrovitz, HN, PB Larsen PB:Effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields on skin microvascular blood perfusion, Wounds 4 (1992), 197.
8. Mayrovitz, HN, PB Larsen: A preliminary study to evaluate the effect of pulsed radio frequency field treatment on lower extremity perivker skin microcirculation of diabetic patients, wounds 7 (1995), 90.
9. D. Gould et al. Visual analogue scale [VAS]. Journal of Clinical Nursing 2001; 10:697-706.
10. Riddle DL, Rothstein JM, Lamb RL. Goniometric reliability in a clinical setting. Shoulder measurements. Physther, 1987; 67 (5):668-673 [PUBMED].
11. Sander Ap,Hajer NM, Hemenway K. Incidence and risk of arm Edema following treatment for breast cancer: a three year follow-up study. QJ med 2005; 98:343-8. [PUBMED].
12. Berish Strauch, MD; Evidence-Based use of pulsed electromagnatic field therapy in clinical plastic Surgery, 2009;135-143.
Published
2018-09-30
How to Cite
1.
Pasari A. Comparison of Conventional Physiotherapy with Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy in Breast Cancer Patients with Lymph-Edema. IABCR [Internet]. 30Sep.2018 [cited 18Oct.2018];4(3):69-2. Available from: https://iabcr.org/index.php/iabcr/article/view/407