A quantitative comparison of arm activity between survivors of breast cancer and healthy controls: use of accelerometry

Fisher, Mary Insana; Davies, Claire; Uhl, Timothy L.

doi:10.1007/s00520-020-05365-5

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Compared with the arm on the contralateral side, the operated arm is therefore commonly moved less. A previous study showed that activity in the non-dominant arm was significantly lower than that in the dominant arm postoperatively ( Fisher, Davies & Uhl, 2020 ). Furthermore, we did not find a significant correlation between WBS and proprioceptive components such as reposition angle error and PMI at the second visit.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…In this way, the use of the limb improves the cortical representation ( Gindrat et al, 2015 ). Considering that the dominant arm is used more than the non-dominant arm after breast cancer surgery ( Fisher, Davies & Uhl, 2020 ), the BrCS who underwent surgery on their dominant side (DS) might have better hand LRJT results than the BrCS who underwent surgery on their non-dominant side (NDS). Nico et al (2004) found poor discrimination performance in amputees wearing prostheses compared to controls and amputees not wearing prostheses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Distorted body schema after mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: a 4-month follow up study

Kim

Yang²,

et al. 2022

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background After breast cancer, some patients report residual pain-related upper limb disability without physical impairment. Although pain and altered proprioception are known to affect the working body schema (WBS), there is little available evidence investigating the WBS of breast cancer survivors (BrCS). WBS—body representations in the brain—affect the “neuromatrix” that modulates pain sensitivity and the threshold for threatening stimuli. The aim of this study was to investigate whether WBS was disrupted after mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) for breast cancer and whether pain and proprioceptive changes affected WBS. Methods Thirty-five BrCS participated in the 4-month follow-up study. They were observed at 1 and 4 months postoperatively. The main outcome measures were the left right judgement test (LRJT) results, absolute angle error, pectoralis minor length index (PMI), pain, and Quick-Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Q-DASH) score. They were measured at each observation, and parametric tests were performed to identify the nature of WBS. Results Both the reaction time and accuracy of the hand LRJT were poorer than those of the foot and back LRJT (p < 0.001). The hand LRJT reaction time and accuracy were unchanged over the total follow-up period (p = 0.77 and p = 0.47, respectively). There was a weak correlation between the LRJT reaction time and PMI (r = −0.26, p = 0.07), pain severity (r = 0.37, p = 0.02), and Q-DASH score (r = 0.37, p = 0.02). There was also a weak correlation between LRJT accuracy and Q-DASH score (r = −0.31, p = 0.04). The LRJT accuracy of BrCS who underwent surgery on their dominant side was higher than that of BrCS who underwent surgery on their non-dominant side (p = 0.002). Regression analysis found a weak but significant relationship between the early hand LRJT results and late pain severity (adjusted R2 = 0.179, p = 0.007). A similar relationship was found between early hand LRJT results and Q-DASH score (adjusted R2 = 0.099, p = 0.039). Conclusion To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study providing the nature of WBS after mastectomy with IBR. In this population, it is necessary to postoperatively preserve WBS integrity for pain and upper limb disability.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distorted body schema after mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: a 4-month follow up study

Kim

Yang²,

et al. 2022

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Table 4 shows the prediction accuracy, recall, specificity, and f1-score for upper limb functioning in ten breast cancer survivors for the left and right arm following the pretrained MLM [8]. Good accuracy is presented for the pre-trained MLM [9].…”

Section: Prediction Accuracymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Adding objective upper limb functional monitoring in daily life to self-reported outcomes could lead to a more comprehensive, all-encompassing upper limb assessment in breast cancer survivors. Wearable motion sensors could provide the ideal opportunity for this [8]. Upper limb wearables could clarify functional daily activities in different clinical populations, such as more recently obtained data in the post-stroke population, who often suffer from severe upper limb impairments [8][9][10][11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing Upper Limb Function in Breast Cancer Survivors Using Wearable Sensors and Machine Learning in a Free-Living Environment

Vets,

De Groef,

Verbeelen

et al. 2023

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(1) Background: Being able to objectively assess upper limb (UL) dysfunction in breast cancer survivors (BCS) is an emerging issue. This study aims to determine the accuracy of a pre-trained lab-based machine learning model (MLM) to distinguish functional from non-functional arm movements in a home situation in BCS. (2) Methods: Participants performed four daily life activities while wearing two wrist accelerometers and being video recorded. To define UL functioning, video data were annotated and accelerometer data were analyzed using a counts threshold method and an MLM. Prediction accuracy, recall, sensitivity, f1-score, ‘total minutes functional activity’ and ‘percentage functionally active’ were considered. (3) Results: Despite a good MLM accuracy (0.77–0.90), recall, and specificity, the f1-score was poor. An overestimation of the ‘total minutes functional activity’ and ‘percentage functionally active’ was found by the MLM. Between the video-annotated data and the functional activity determined by the MLM, the mean differences were 0.14% and 0.10% for the left and right side, respectively. For the video-annotated data versus the counts threshold method, the mean differences were 0.27% and 0.24%, respectively. (4) Conclusions: An MLM is a better alternative than the counts threshold method for distinguishing functional from non-functional arm movements. However, the abovementioned wrist accelerometer-based assessment methods overestimate UL functional activity.

show abstract

Is it really over when it is over? physical, mental and emotional health status of long-term breast cancer survivors compared to healthy matched controls

Álvarez-Salvago,

Gutiérrez-García,

Molina-García

et al. 2024

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A quantitative comparison of arm activity between survivors of breast cancer and healthy controls: use of accelerometry

Cited by 6 publications

References 33 publications

Distorted body schema after mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: a 4-month follow up study

Distorted body schema after mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: a 4-month follow up study

Assessing Upper Limb Function in Breast Cancer Survivors Using Wearable Sensors and Machine Learning in a Free-Living Environment

Is it really over when it is over? physical, mental and emotional health status of long-term breast cancer survivors compared to healthy matched controls

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About