Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Review of National and International Consensuses on Chronic Lymphedema

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Lymphedema

  • 1880 Accesses

Abstract

Consensus documents are produced in an effort to help move a field forward and/or to offer to patients the best evidence/expert-based treatment approaches. The results can be positive, by promoting clearly beneficial options in the face of multiple choices, but they can also be harmful by limiting therapeutic options and stifling research for future advances. Some physicians, policy-makers, and patients desire documents with clear unalterable protocols, whereas an equal cohort exists that believe that these documents confine and distort the practice of medicine. An inherent problem that will not easily be resolved is that these types of guidelines are based on studies of populations of patients and generate protocols appropriate for a range of patients. However, each patient brings his or her own individual constellation of issues and findings, rendering it impossible for a consensus to address each item. Therefore, sound clinical judgment and modification will always be required.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 159.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Doucette S, Moher D. How quickly do systematic reviews go out of date? A survival analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:224-233.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Qaseem A, Snow V, Owens DK, Shekelle P. The development of clinical practice guidelines and guidance statements of the American College of Physicians: summary of methods. Ann Intern Med. 2010;153:194-199.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tricoci P, Allen JM, Kramer JM, Califf RM, Smith SC. Scientific evidence underlying the ACC/AHA clinical practice guidelines. JAMA. 2009;301:831-841.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hampton JR. Evidence-based medicine, opinion-based medicine, and real-world medicine. Perspect Biol Med. 2002;45:549-568.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. International Society of Lymphology. The diagnosis and treatment of peripheral lymphedema: 2009 consensus document. Lymphology. 2009;42(2):51-60.

    Google Scholar 

  6. International Society of Lymphology Executive Committee. The diagnosis and treatment of peripheral lymphedema. Lymphology. 1995;28:113-117.

    Google Scholar 

  7. International Lymphoedema Framework Project. Best Practice for the Management of Lymphoedema: International Consensus. London: Medical Education Partnership Ltd; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Campisi C, Michelini S, Boccardo F. Guidelines of the societá italiana di linfangiologia. Lymphology. 2004;37:165-184.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ciucci JL. 1st Latin American consensus on the management of lymphedema. Phlebolymphology. 2004;44:258-264.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Australian Health Ministers’ Advisory Council Report. A review of current practices and future directions in the diagnosis, prevention and treatment of lymphoedema in Australia 2006. Available at: http://www.msac.gov.au/internet/msac/publishing.nsf/Content/Review+of+lymphoedema+in+Australia accessed 05/11/2011.

  11. Rockson SG, Miller LT, Senie R, et al. American Cancer Society lymphedema workshop. Workgroup III: diagnosis and management of lymphedema. Cancer. 1998;83(12):2882-2885.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. National Lymphedema Network Medical Advisory Committee. Position statement of the treatment of lymphedema [document on the Internet]. National Lymphedema Network; 2011 [updated 2011, February]. Available at: http://www.lymphnet.org/pdfDocs/nlntreatment.pdf accessed 05/11/2011.

  13. Isaacs D, Fitzgerald D. Seven alternatives to evidence based medicine. BMJ. 1999;319:1618.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Groopman J, Hartzband P. Sorting fact from fiction on health care. The Wall Street Journal. August 31, 2009. Available at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203706604574378542143891778.html accessed 05/11/2011.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ, USA

    Michael J. Bernas

Authors
  1. Michael J. Bernas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. George Washington University, Washington D.C, Washington, USA

    Byung-Boong Lee

  2. School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, 92037, California, USA

    John Bergan

  3. Falk Cardiovascular Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, 94305, USA

    Stanley G. Rockson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bernas, M.J. (2011). Review of National and International Consensuses on Chronic Lymphedema. In: Lee, BB., Bergan, J., Rockson, S. (eds) Lymphedema. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-567-5_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-567-5_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-85729-566-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-85729-567-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation