PURPOSE: To ascertain how change in upper body lymphedema is assessed and understand how clinically significant change is determined. METHOD: A systematic search of the literature resulted in 55 eligible studies for analysis. RESULTS: A range of assessment methods, measurement protocols, and outcomes were used in the literature. Of the 21 studies in which thresholds for change were set a priori, 20 different thresholds were reported. CONCLUSION: How data was measured, analysed and reported was inconsistent across studies. Consensus on a core outcome set with standardised assessment protocols and reporting; and investigation into empirically based minimum important differences (MID) is needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sierla et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: