Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

LIMPRINT: Prevalence of Chronic Edema in Health Services in Copenhagen, Denmark

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{d66a3d4bbf044e55b1dbf7efb8cf349d,
title = "LIMPRINT: Prevalence of Chronic Edema in Health Services in Copenhagen, Denmark",
abstract = "Background: The International Lymphedema Framework developed an international study, Lymphedema Impact and Prevalence International (LIMPRINT), to estimate the prevalence and impact of chronic edema (CO) in heterogeneous populations. Methods and Results: A validation study using the LIMPRINT methodology was undertaken in Denmark. Participants with CO were identified from inpatient services and compared with those identified within a specialist lymphedema service and three primary care settings. Of 452 inpatients available for screening, CO was present in 177 (39{\%}) and absent in 275 (61{\%}). In addition, 723 participants were found from specialist and primary care services (LPCSs). Inpatients were significantly older and more likely to be underweight or normal weight. They were more likely to suffer from heart failure/ischaemic heart disease (44.6{\%} vs. 23.4{\%}, p < 0.001) and have neurological problems (18.1{\%} vs. 10.9{\%} p = 0.009). Patients in the inpatient group were nearly all suffering from secondary lymphedema and were less likely to have a cancer or venous diagnosis, but more likely to have immobility as the cause of CO (44.0{\%} vs. 17.7{\%}, p < 0.001). No inpatients had midline CO compared with 30 within LPCSs. Fewer in the inpatient group had standard CO treatment (17.1{\%} vs. 73.5{\%}, p < 0.001) and subjective control of swelling was worse (19.9{\%} vs. 66.7{\%}, p < 0.001). While the inpatient group experienced fewer acute infections, when they did so, they were more likely to be admitted to hospital for this (78.6{\%} vs. 51.0{\%}, p = 0.049). Conclusion: The prevalence of CO in inpatient facilities is high and those with CO have multiple comorbidities that vary according to setting. The feasibility study showed that the methodology could be adapted for use in different health systems.",
keywords = "Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Body Mass Index, Chronic Disease, Comorbidity, Denmark/epidemiology, Diagnosis, Differential, Edema/diagnosis, Female, Heart Failure/diagnosis, Humans, Inpatients, Lower Extremity/pathology, Lymphatic System/pathology, Lymphedema/diagnosis, Male, Middle Aged, Myocardial Ischemia/diagnosis, Prevalence, Primary Health Care, Quality of Life/psychology",
author = "Susan N{\o}rregaard and Susan Bermark and Tonny Karlsmark and Franks, {Peter J} and Susie Murray and Moffatt, {Christine J}",
year = "2019",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1089/lrb.2019.0019",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "187--194",
journal = "Lymphatic Research and Biology",
issn = "1539-6851",
publisher = "Mary AnnLiebert, Inc. Publishers",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - LIMPRINT

T2 - Prevalence of Chronic Edema in Health Services in Copenhagen, Denmark

AU - Nørregaard, Susan

AU - Bermark, Susan

AU - Karlsmark, Tonny

AU - Franks, Peter J

AU - Murray, Susie

AU - Moffatt, Christine J

PY - 2019/4

Y1 - 2019/4

N2 - Background: The International Lymphedema Framework developed an international study, Lymphedema Impact and Prevalence International (LIMPRINT), to estimate the prevalence and impact of chronic edema (CO) in heterogeneous populations. Methods and Results: A validation study using the LIMPRINT methodology was undertaken in Denmark. Participants with CO were identified from inpatient services and compared with those identified within a specialist lymphedema service and three primary care settings. Of 452 inpatients available for screening, CO was present in 177 (39%) and absent in 275 (61%). In addition, 723 participants were found from specialist and primary care services (LPCSs). Inpatients were significantly older and more likely to be underweight or normal weight. They were more likely to suffer from heart failure/ischaemic heart disease (44.6% vs. 23.4%, p < 0.001) and have neurological problems (18.1% vs. 10.9% p = 0.009). Patients in the inpatient group were nearly all suffering from secondary lymphedema and were less likely to have a cancer or venous diagnosis, but more likely to have immobility as the cause of CO (44.0% vs. 17.7%, p < 0.001). No inpatients had midline CO compared with 30 within LPCSs. Fewer in the inpatient group had standard CO treatment (17.1% vs. 73.5%, p < 0.001) and subjective control of swelling was worse (19.9% vs. 66.7%, p < 0.001). While the inpatient group experienced fewer acute infections, when they did so, they were more likely to be admitted to hospital for this (78.6% vs. 51.0%, p = 0.049). Conclusion: The prevalence of CO in inpatient facilities is high and those with CO have multiple comorbidities that vary according to setting. The feasibility study showed that the methodology could be adapted for use in different health systems.

AB - Background: The International Lymphedema Framework developed an international study, Lymphedema Impact and Prevalence International (LIMPRINT), to estimate the prevalence and impact of chronic edema (CO) in heterogeneous populations. Methods and Results: A validation study using the LIMPRINT methodology was undertaken in Denmark. Participants with CO were identified from inpatient services and compared with those identified within a specialist lymphedema service and three primary care settings. Of 452 inpatients available for screening, CO was present in 177 (39%) and absent in 275 (61%). In addition, 723 participants were found from specialist and primary care services (LPCSs). Inpatients were significantly older and more likely to be underweight or normal weight. They were more likely to suffer from heart failure/ischaemic heart disease (44.6% vs. 23.4%, p < 0.001) and have neurological problems (18.1% vs. 10.9% p = 0.009). Patients in the inpatient group were nearly all suffering from secondary lymphedema and were less likely to have a cancer or venous diagnosis, but more likely to have immobility as the cause of CO (44.0% vs. 17.7%, p < 0.001). No inpatients had midline CO compared with 30 within LPCSs. Fewer in the inpatient group had standard CO treatment (17.1% vs. 73.5%, p < 0.001) and subjective control of swelling was worse (19.9% vs. 66.7%, p < 0.001). While the inpatient group experienced fewer acute infections, when they did so, they were more likely to be admitted to hospital for this (78.6% vs. 51.0%, p = 0.049). Conclusion: The prevalence of CO in inpatient facilities is high and those with CO have multiple comorbidities that vary according to setting. The feasibility study showed that the methodology could be adapted for use in different health systems.

KW - Aged

KW - Aged, 80 and over

KW - Body Mass Index

KW - Chronic Disease

KW - Comorbidity

KW - Denmark/epidemiology

KW - Diagnosis, Differential

KW - Edema/diagnosis

KW - Female

KW - Heart Failure/diagnosis

KW - Humans

KW - Inpatients

KW - Lower Extremity/pathology

KW - Lymphatic System/pathology

KW - Lymphedema/diagnosis

KW - Male

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Myocardial Ischemia/diagnosis

KW - Prevalence

KW - Primary Health Care

KW - Quality of Life/psychology

U2 - 10.1089/lrb.2019.0019

DO - 10.1089/lrb.2019.0019

M3 - Journal article

VL - 17

SP - 187

EP - 194

JO - Lymphatic Research and Biology

JF - Lymphatic Research and Biology

SN - 1539-6851

IS - 2

ER -

ID: 59164901