Comparison of shoulder flexibility, strength, and function between breast cancer survivors and healthy participants
- 1.1k Downloads
Deficits after breast cancer treatment have been examined by comparing the surgically affected upper extremity to the unaffected extremity. It is not possible to know precisely if anti-cancer treatment such as radiation and chemotherapy had any effect on the unaffected arm. The purpose of this study was to compare ROM, strength, and shoulder function between breast cancer survivors and healthy, matched controls.
Shoulder pain and function was assessed using the Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder Hand (DASH) and the Pennsylvania Shoulder Score (PSS). Active and passive range of motion (ROM) for shoulder flexion, extension, external rotation (ER) at 0° and 90° of abduction, internal rotation (IR) at 90° of abduction were measured on the affected side using a digital inclinometer. Strength was measured using a hand held dynamometer for scapular abduction and upward rotation, scapular depression and adduction, flexion, internal rotation, ER, scaption, and horizontal adduction.
Significant differences were found between the two groups for the DASH (p < 0.001) and PSS (p < 0.001), active flexion (p < 0.001), 90° ER (p = 0.020), extension (p = 0.004) and passive flexion (p < 0.001) and 90° ER (p = 0.012). All 7 of the shoulder girdle strength measures were significantly different between groups for abduction and upward rotation (p = 0.006), depression and adduction (p = 0.001), flexion (p < 0.001), ER (p = 0.004), IR (p = 0.001), scaption (p < 0.001), and adduction (p < 0.001).
These results provide preliminary evidence to suggest clinicians focus on these particular ROM, strength, and shoulder function measures when treating a breast cancer survivors.
Implications for Cancer Survivors
Shoulder ROM, strength, and function are important to assess in BCS.
KeywordsBreast cancer Shoulder Shoulder function Oncology
- 1.American Cancer Society. How many women get breast cancer? 2009 [cited 2007 8/23/07]; Available from: http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_2_1X_How_many_people_get_breast_cancer_5.asp?sitearea=.
- 22.Merchant CR, Chapman T, Kilbreath SL, Refshaunge KM, Krupa, K. Decreased muscle strength following management of breast cancer. Disability Rehabiliation. 2008;30(15):1098–105.Google Scholar
- 23.Shamley DR, Srinanaganathan R, Weatherall R, Oskrochi R, Watson M, Ostlere S, et al. Changes in shoulder muscle size and activity after treatment for breast cancer: a study using EMG and MRI scans. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007;106(1):19–27.Google Scholar
- 24.Institute for Work & Health and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery. The DASH outcome measure. 2006.Google Scholar
- 25.Dowrick AS, Gabbe BJ, et al. Outcome Instruments For The Assessment Of The Upper Extremity Following Trauma: A Review. Int J Care Injured. 2004;36:468–76.Google Scholar
- 28.Norkin CC, White DJ. Measurement of joint motion: a guide to goniometry. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis Company; 1985.Google Scholar
- 29.Kendall FP, McCreary EK, Provance PG. In: Bultler JP, editor. Muscles testing and function. 4th ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1993.Google Scholar
- 30.Hislop HJ, Montgomery J. Muscle testing: techniques of manual examination. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2002.Google Scholar
- 38.Sugden EM et al. Shoulder movement after the treatment of early stage breast cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 1998;10(3):173–81.Google Scholar