Premium
Lymphedema management training for physical therapy students in the united states
Author(s) -
Augustine Elizabeth,
Corn Matthew,
Danoff Jerome
Publication year - 1998
Publication title -
cancer
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.052
H-Index - 304
eISSN - 1097-0142
pISSN - 0008-543X
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19981215)83:12b+<2869::aid-cncr41>3.0.co;2-u
Subject(s) - lymphedema , medicine , curriculum , accreditation , lymphatic system , physical therapy , family medicine , medical education , pathology , cancer , breast cancer , psychology , pedagogy
BACKGROUND The objective of this study was to determine to what extent accredited physical therapy programs in the United States were presenting the principles of lymphedema management and whether regional differences existed. METHODS States were grouped into four geographic regions: Northeast, South, Midwest, and West. From mid‐June to mid‐July, 1997, 63 of 148 (42.6%) accredited physical therapy (PT) programs in the United States completed and returned the questionnaires. Participants received a cover letter, consent form, and lymphedema survey by e‐mail, facsimile, or regular post. The lymphedema survey covered a wide variety of issues relating to five areas: 1) general and 2) specific anatomy and physiology of the lymphatic system, 3) pathogenesis of lymphedema, 4) traditional (compression pumps/garments), and 5) innovative (European/Australian) treatment techniques for lymphedema. "Yes" responses indicated that specific information was included in the curriculum. Frequency of yes responses for each of the five areas were counted and converted into percentages. Regional responses were compared with the total combined responses with a modified binomial technique. RESULTS PT programs in the United States were providing 89% of our designated content in the general anatomy and physiology of the lymphatic system, 73% in the pathogenesis of lymphedema, 65% in traditional treatment techniques, 48% in innovative treatment techniques, and 42% in the specific anatomy and physiology of the lymphatic system. No individual region differed significantly ( P > 0.05) from the combined results. CONCLUSIONS The participating PT programs appeared to be providing instruction in general anatomy and physiology of the lymphatic system, pathogenesis of lymphedema, and traditional treatment techniques. However, far less instruction on the specific anatomy and physiology of the lymphatic system and innovative treatment techniques is offered. We believe that PT students would benefit with more curricular content in these latter two categories in order to acquire the knowledge and skills to combat the devastating effects of lymphedema. Cancer 1998;83:2869‐2873. © 1998 American Cancer Society.