Exercise Protocol With Limited Shoulder Range of Motion for 15 or 30 Days After Conservative Surgery for Breast Cancer With Oncoplastic Technique: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Effectiveness of an expert assessment and individualised treatment compared with a minimal home-based exercise program in women with late-term shoulder impairments after primary breast cancer surgery: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

In breast cancer patients, late-term upper limb sequelae, such as shoulder pain and impaired shoulder function, remain common after primary breast cancer surgery. The aim of this trial is to evaluate whether an expert assessment of shoulder impairments, followed by an individualised treatment plan, is superior to a minimal physiotherapeutic rehabilitation program in reducing shoulder symptoms, among women with late-term shoulder impairments after primary breast cancer.

Methods/design

The study is designed as a stratified, parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomised, controlled trial conducted in Denmark; 130 participants with late-term shoulder impairments 3–7 years after primary surgery for breast cancer will be recruited. Participants will be randomised (allocation 1:1) to either an expert assessment of shoulder impairments followed by an individualised treatment plan or to follow a minimal physiotherapeutic rehabilitation program delivered in a pamphlet. The primary outcome will be a change in shoulder pain and function from baseline to 12 weeks after initiating the treatment, as measured by the patient-reported outcome Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) questionnaire.

Discussion

There has been an insufficient focus in research and clinical practice on late-term shoulder impairment in women following surgery for breast cancer. This trial will focus on interventions towards late-term shoulder impairments and is expected to provide evidence-based knowledge to physiotherapists and women about the management of shoulder pain and impaired shoulder function.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05277909. Registered on 11 March 2022.

Conservative interventions and clinical outcome measures used in the perioperative rehabilitation of breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy: a scoping review

Background

Mastectomy is the first-line treatment approach for more than 90% of breast cancer patients. The numerous physical impairments associated with this surgical procedure negatively impact the patient’s quality of life. To date, rehabilitation resources available for breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy within the institutions affiliated to the Centre intégré universitaire de soins de santé et de services sociaux de la Mauricie-et-du-Centre-du-Québec (CIUSSS-MCQ) are lacking and do not always seem to reflect the particularities of breast cancer care pathways. The purpose of this review was to identify and describe the conservative interventions and the clinical outcome measures used in the perioperative physical rehabilitation of women with breast cancer who are awaiting or have undergone mastectomy. We also aimed to report on the barriers and facilitators to study participation and completion.

Methods

MEDLINE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to January 2021, and we updated the search on July 11, 2022. We included peer-reviewed English and French literature with quantitative designs, describing conservative interventions and clinical outcome measures used within rehabilitation programs designed for women who were awaiting or had undergone mastectomy. Paired reviewers independently reviewed all citations and articles using a two-phase screening process and independently extracted the data.

Results

Of the 6080 articles identified, 57 met the inclusion criteria. Most interventions were multimodal, which combined exercise with patient education, manual therapy, and/or lymphatic drainage. The most frequently used objective measures of physical function were shoulder range of motion, muscle strength, and signs of lymphedema. In contrast, the primary patient-reported outcome measures were quality of life, shoulder function, and pain. Undergoing another breast surgery, death, and cancer recurrence were the most reported barriers to study completion.

Conclusion

This scoping review reports on the heterogeneity and wide range of conservative interventions and clinical outcome measures used in the physical rehabilitation of breast cancer patients who had undergone or were scheduled to undergo mastectomy. Tailoring interventions to breast cancer patients’ needs and promoting outpatient rehabilitation interventions appear to be better suited to the particularities of breast cancer care pathways. Further research is needed to better identify barriers and facilitators to study participation and completion.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12905-022-01927-3.

Strength Training versus Stretching for Improving Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

(1) Background: Stretching is known to improve range of motion (ROM), and evidence has suggested that strength training (ST) is effective too. However, it is unclear whether its efficacy is comparable to stretching. The goal was to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of ST and stretching on ROM (INPLASY 10.37766/inplasy2020.9.0098). (2) Methods: Cochrane Library, EBSCO, PubMed, Scielo, Scopus, and Web of Science were consulted in October 2020 and updated in March 2021, followed by search within reference lists and expert suggestions (no constraints on language or year). Eligibility criteria: (P) Humans of any condition; (I) ST interventions; (C) stretching (O) ROM; (S) supervised RCTs. (3) Results: Eleven articles (n = 452 participants) were included. Pooled data showed no differences between ST and stretching on ROM (ES = −0.22; 95% CI = −0.55 to 0.12; p = 0.206). Sub-group analyses based on risk of bias, active vs. passive ROM, and movement-per-joint analyses showed no between-protocol differences in ROM gains. (4) Conclusions: ST and stretching were not different in their effects on ROM, but the studies were highly heterogeneous in terms of design, protocols and populations, and so further research is warranted. However, the qualitative effects of all the studies were quite homogeneous.