Aquatic Exercise Training Outcomes on Functional Capacity, Quality of Life, and Lower Limb Lymphedema: Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether patients with lower limb lymphedema (LLL) can benefit from water immersion exercise training to improve functional capacity, quality of life (QOL), and help control/diminish limb volume. DESIGN: A before-after trial. SETTING: A community University Sports Center. SUBJECTS: Eleven participants were recruited to participate and four declined to pursue the study for personal reasons. A convenient sample of seven female affected by either bilateral or unilateral LLL volunteered for this pilot study. Patients had primary or secondary lymphedema as complications of melanoma or gynecologic cancers. INTERVENTIONS: An aquatic training exercise intervention of moderate to vigorous intensity was conducted for a 6-week period (12 sessions of 45 min). This innovative circuit training program consisted of yoga exercises, aqua-jogging, pedaling on a water bike, and muscular training on an aquastep and a trampoline. OUTCOME MEASURES: The physical characteristics of water could be used to overcome the physical and medical limitations encountered on dry land for patients with LLL to exercise and reach training benefits. Outcome measures were the 6-min walk test (6MWT), handgrip strength test, QOL for limb lymphedema questionnaire (LYMQOL), bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy, and limb circumference. RESULTS: The distance covered in the 6MWT and the handgrip strength were significantly improved. A trend toward an increase in the overall QOL score was noticeable, whereas a significantly improved emotions score was observed with the LYMQOL questionnaire. Limb circumferential volume was significantly lower and impedance was increased, denoting a decrease in lymphatic fluid. CONCLUSIONS: Innovative aquatic exercise training program allows moderate and vigorous intensity activities for patients with LLL, increases functional capacity and QOL. Thus, immersion exercise does not appear to exacerbate LLL and a randomized clinical trial with larger numbers is essential to consolidate the results of this study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".