The Utilization of e-Health in Lymphedema Care: A Narrative Review.

Background: Electronic health (e-Health), refers to technologies that can be utilized to enhance patient care as well as collect and share health information. e-Health comprises several umbrella terms, including telehealth, mobile health, e-Health, wearables, and artificial intelligence. The types of e-Health technologies being utilized in lymphedema (LE) care are unknown. Method: In this narrative review, a search of published research on the utilization of e-Health technologies in LE-related care was conducted. Results: Five different types of e-Health modalities were found (robotics, artificial intelligence, electronic medical records, smart wearable devices, and instructive online information) spanning 14 use cases and 4 phases of care (preventative, diagnostic, assessment, and treatment phases). Broad e-Health utilization examples were found including robotic-assisted surgery to reduce the likelihood of LE after lymphadenectomy, machine learning to predict patients at risk of filarial-related LE, and a novel wearable device prototype designed to provide lymphatic drainage. Conclusions: e-Health has reported merit in the prevention, diagnoses, assessment, and treatment of LE with utilization demonstrating cutting edge applicability of e-Health for achieving optimal patient care and outcomes. As technology continues to advance, additional research into the utilization of e-Health in LE care is warranted.

Does Lymphedema Severity Affect Quality of Life? Simple Question. Challenging Answers.

PURPOSE: Lymphedema can have a negative impact on the function and quality of life (QOL) of patients, but most studies have examined lymphedema as a binary variable, rather than a multidimensional disease that ranges in severity. This study explored the potential impact of lymphedema severity on function and overall QOL. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of the 54 lymphedema patients recruited, 40 reported their most severe swelling to be in a limb. These participants underwent bioimpedance measurement (L-Dex®) and completed either the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) questionnaire or the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS). All participants completed the lymphedema quality of life questionnaire (LYMQOL) and were categorized for severity using International Society of Lymphology (ISL) stage. Mild (Stage 0-I), moderate (Stage IIa), and severe (Stage IIb-III) lymphedema accounted for 22%, 50%, and 28% of the participants, respectively. The median [inter-quartile range (IQR)] L-Dex score was 17.8 (6.6-52.7) for arm participants and 36.4 (15.9-93.5) for leg participants. Apart from a mild difference in LYMQOL ARM Appearance domain (p = 0.046), ISL staging did not have any relationship with DASH, LEFS, and LYMQOL domains, or overall QOL. Higher L-Dex was related to poorer function (DASH p = 0.015; LEFS p = 0.019), but was not related to overall QOL of limb lymphedema participants (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Lymphedema severity did not appear to impact QOL. ISL staging may not be used alone to describe lymphedema severity. Other methods such as bioimpedance, imaging, and self-report of symptoms are required to fully evaluate the impact of lymphedema severity on function and QOL.