4.7 Article

The characteristics of physical activity and gait in patients receiving radiotherapy in cancer induced bone pain

期刊

RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY
卷 111, 期 1, 页码 18-24

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2013.10.023

关键词

Radiotherapy; Bone metastases; Biomarker; Physical activity; Gait

资金

  1. Faculty of Medicine at the Norwegian University of Technology and Science in Trondheim, Norway
  2. Translational Medicine Research Collaboration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and purpose: An objective measure of pain relief may add important information to patients' self assessment, particularly after a treatment. The study aims were to determine whether measures of physical activity and/or gait can be used in characterizing cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) and whether these biomarkers are sensitive to treatment response, in patients receiving radiotherapy (XRT) for CIBP. Materials and methods: Patients were assessed before (baseline) and 6-8 weeks after XRT (follow up). The following assessments were done: Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), activPAL (TM) activity meter, and GAITRite (R) electronic walkway (measure of gait). Wilcoxon, Mann Whitney and Pearson statistical analyses were done. Results: Sixty patients were assessed at baseline; median worst pain was 7 and walking interference was 5. At follow up 42 patients were assessed. BPI worst pain, average pain, walking interference and total functional interference all improved (p < 0.001). An improvement in functional interference correlated with aspects of physical activity (daily hours standing r = 0.469, p = 0.002) and gait (cadence r = 0.341, p = 0.03). The activPAL and GAITRite parameters did not change following XRT (p > 0.05). In responder analyses there were no differences in activPAL and GAITRite parameters (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Assessment of physical activity and gait allow a characterization of the functional aspects of CIBP, but not in the evaluation of XRT. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据