Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Métodos Terapéuticos y Terapias MTCI
Bases de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord ; 9(2): 461-470, 2021 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32470618

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to define the current forms of treatment in a contemporary population of lymphedema (LED) patients for LED related to breast cancer, the most prevalently diagnosed LED comorbidity in Western countries, and phlebolymphedema with venous leg ulcer (PLEDU), a sequela of chronic venous disease. The goals of LED therapy are to reduce edema, thereby improving function and related symptoms, and to improve skin integrity to prevent development of infection. Treatment is generally nonsurgical: conservative care, including complex physical therapy, manual lymphatic drainage, and compression bandaging; or pneumatic compression device (PCD) therapy by a simple nonprogrammable device or an advanced programmable device. METHODS: To determine the frequency of individual types of treatment for LED and their relationship to breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) and PLEDU, we queried claims from a deidentified Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant commercial administrative insurance database with >165 million members. A total of 26,902 patients identified with LED who had been enrolled with continuous medical benefits for 12 months before and after the index date for the complete years 2012 through 2016 were separated into four treatment categories: no treatment, conservative care, simple PCD (SPCD), and advanced PCD. LED treatment was related to the BCRL and PLEDU comorbidities. RESULTS: BCRL patients, who represented 32.1% of all study patients, made up 41% of all patients receiving conservative care and 24% of patients receiving PCD therapy. By contrast, PLEDU patients (9.6% of study patients) were proportionally under-represented in the conservative care group (7.8%) but composed a disproportionately high share of the PCD therapy group (17.7%). PLEDU patients represented 23.5% of all LED patients prescribed SPCD therapy, whereas BCRL patients composed 10.3% of total LED patient SPCD prescriptions (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of a large health care administrative database showed clear differences between the way BCRL and PLEDU patients are treated. Compared with BCRL patients, PLEDU patients were less likely to receive conservative care and more likely to be prescribed SPCDs for pneumatic compression therapy. These differences suggest that lymphatic therapy may be undervalued for treatment of chronic venous swelling and prevention and treatment of PLEDU.


Asunto(s)
Linfedema del Cáncer de Mama/terapia , Vendajes de Compresión/tendencias , Tratamiento Conservador/tendencias , Drenaje/tendencias , Aparatos de Compresión Neumática Intermitente/tendencias , Linfedema/terapia , Modalidades de Fisioterapia/tendencias , Úlcera Varicosa/terapia , Insuficiencia Venosa/terapia , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Linfedema del Cáncer de Mama/diagnóstico , Linfedema del Cáncer de Mama/epidemiología , Niño , Preescolar , Enfermedad Crónica , Comorbilidad , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Seguro de Salud , Linfedema/diagnóstico , Linfedema/epidemiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Úlcera Varicosa/diagnóstico , Úlcera Varicosa/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Venosa/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Venosa/epidemiología , Adulto Joven
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA