Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Are fewer circumference measurements reliable to determine volume measurements in lower limb lymphedema compared to every 4th cm?

Jönsson, C LU ; Johansson, K LU ; Bjurberg, M LU and Brogårdh, Christina LU (2021) The 28th World Congress of Lymphology p.70-70
Abstract
Objective: In lymphedema management, lower limb volume is commonly assessed by circumference measurement
every 4th cm which is however time-consuming. The aim of this study is to evaluate the agreement between volume
measurements derived from circumference measurements every 4th cm (V4) with every 8th cm (V8) and every 12th cm
(V12) in patients with lower limb lymphedema (LLL) and to determine the test-retest reliability of these methods.
Material-Method: Thirty women with unilateral or bilateral LLL were measured twice, two weeks apart using
circumference measurements every 4th cm. Inclusion criteria: (i) primary or secondary LLL; (ii) persistent lymphedema
for the past 6 months; (iii) daily treatment with... (More)
Objective: In lymphedema management, lower limb volume is commonly assessed by circumference measurement
every 4th cm which is however time-consuming. The aim of this study is to evaluate the agreement between volume
measurements derived from circumference measurements every 4th cm (V4) with every 8th cm (V8) and every 12th cm
(V12) in patients with lower limb lymphedema (LLL) and to determine the test-retest reliability of these methods.
Material-Method: Thirty women with unilateral or bilateral LLL were measured twice, two weeks apart using
circumference measurements every 4th cm. Inclusion criteria: (i) primary or secondary LLL; (ii) persistent lymphedema
for the past 6 months; (iii) daily treatment with compression stockings. Exclusion criteria: (i) ongoing LE treatment; (ii)
comorbidity affecting lower limb volume. Volume was calculated using the truncated cone formulae. Statistics: Intraclass
correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman plots with limits of agreement, standard error of measurement (SEM%) and the
smallest real difference (SRD%).
Results (preliminary): Overall, there are high agreement between the V4 and the V8 and V12 methods (ICCs 0.99).
Also, the test-retest reliability is high for all three methods (ICC 0.99 for V4, V8 and V12, respectively) and the measurement
error low both for a group of subjects (SEM%: 1.2%-1.5%) and a single subject (SRD%: 3.4%-4.1%).
Conclusions: The V8 and V12 methods agree sufficiently with the V4 gold standard method. All three methods are reliable
with small measurement errors indicating that real clinical changes can be detected over time. Fewer circumference
measurements can therefore be recommended in the management of LLL (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; and
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to conference
publication status
published
subject
pages
70 - 70
conference name
The 28th World Congress of Lymphology
conference location
Athens, Greece
conference dates
2021-09-20 - 2021-09-24
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
077d260c-238c-4040-8c67-3914bb9ebcf6
alternative location
https://isl2021lymphology.com/abstract-booklet
date added to LUP
2022-04-06 08:55:41
date last changed
2022-04-06 08:55:41
@misc{077d260c-238c-4040-8c67-3914bb9ebcf6,
  abstract     = {{Objective: In lymphedema management, lower limb volume is commonly assessed by circumference measurement<br/>every 4th cm which is however time-consuming. The aim of this study is to evaluate the agreement between volume<br/>measurements derived from circumference measurements every 4th cm (V4) with every 8th cm (V8) and every 12th cm<br/>(V12) in patients with lower limb lymphedema (LLL) and to determine the test-retest reliability of these methods.<br/>Material-Method: Thirty women with unilateral or bilateral LLL were measured twice, two weeks apart using<br/>circumference measurements every 4th cm. Inclusion criteria: (i) primary or secondary LLL; (ii) persistent lymphedema<br/>for the past 6 months; (iii) daily treatment with compression stockings. Exclusion criteria: (i) ongoing LE treatment; (ii)<br/>comorbidity affecting lower limb volume. Volume was calculated using the truncated cone formulae. Statistics: Intraclass<br/>correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman plots with limits of agreement, standard error of measurement (SEM%) and the<br/>smallest real difference (SRD%).<br/>Results (preliminary): Overall, there are high agreement between the V4 and the V8 and V12 methods (ICCs 0.99).<br/>Also, the test-retest reliability is high for all three methods (ICC 0.99 for V4, V8 and V12, respectively) and the measurement<br/>error low both for a group of subjects (SEM%: 1.2%-1.5%) and a single subject (SRD%: 3.4%-4.1%).<br/>Conclusions: The V8 and V12 methods agree sufficiently with the V4 gold standard method. All three methods are reliable<br/>with small measurement errors indicating that real clinical changes can be detected over time. Fewer circumference<br/>measurements can therefore be recommended in the management of LLL}},
  author       = {{Jönsson, C and Johansson, K and Bjurberg, M and Brogårdh, Christina}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  pages        = {{70--70}},
  title        = {{Are fewer circumference measurements reliable to determine volume measurements in lower limb lymphedema compared to every 4th cm?}},
  url          = {{https://isl2021lymphology.com/abstract-booklet}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}