Using Group Concept Mapping to Define Priorities for Lymphedema Care and Research

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Cancer-related lymphedema is a common, lifelong, and disabling condition resulting from oncologic treatments. Although multidisciplinary collaboration enhances patient outcomes, a framework for research and therapeutic priorities for prevention and treatment is lacking. This study utilizes group concept mapping (GCM), a participatory research methodology, to highlight clinical and scholarly priorities. METHODS: Providers and researchers involved in lymphedema care at The Ohio State University, a Lymphatic Education & Research Network (LE&RN) Center of Excellence, participated in a GCM study between November 2024 and January 2025. The groupwisdom® web-platform was used to (1) generate ideas for clinical/academic priorities for multidisciplinary collaboration, (2) sort priorities into categories, and (3) rate priorities on (a) the basis of their contribution to value-based care and (b) likelihood to secure research funding. Hierarchical cluster analysis yielded two-dimensional representations of conceptual similarity between items. Ratings were synthesized into GoZone plots demonstrating priorities most likely to secure funding and contribute to high-value care. RESULTS: Thirty-five participants identified 74 priority areas. Cluster domains included: (1) identification/validation of patient-reported outcome metrics, (2) optimizing prospective surveillance, (3) surgical prevention/management of lymphedema, (4) diagnosis of lymphedema and downstream sequelae, (5) identifying risk factors/prediction tools, (6) basic/translational research, and (7) access to care/resource utilization. Improving access to care and mitigating resource barriers were deemed most impactful for delivering high-value care and ability to secure research funding. CONCLUSIONS: Priorities identified at our LE&RN Lymphedema Center of Excellence provide a framework for multidisciplinary collaboration to improve care delivery and patient outcomes for those with and at-risk for cancer-related lymphedema.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.