PTOTSystematic ReviewEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2023

Postural alterations in breast cancer survivors: proposal of the PABS evaluation protocol based on a systematic review.

Elisa Doro, Valentina Azzollini, Matteo Ghilli and 2 others

PMID 37166434

WHAT IT FOUND

Breast cancer survivors consistently show worsened posture and balance after treatment, but current research uses such different measurement tools that results cannot be compared.

The authors propose a standardized assessment protocol to fix this, though no specific rehabilitation technique has been proven superior to others.

Key findings

01All included studies reported worsening in postural assets, balance, muscular strength, pain, and fall risk following breast cancer treatment.

02The extreme variability in assessment tools prevents direct comparison of results and precludes meta-analysis of the available data.

03While various rehabilitation protocols appear effective, it is impossible to determine which treatment works best due to the heterogeneity of outcome measures.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The review excluded other cancer types, so findings apply only to breast cancer survivors. Most included studies were observational or small trials, limiting the strength of evidence for specific treatments. The proposed PABS protocol is a suggestion based on common tools, not a validated instrument tested in this study. The review notes that physiotherapists or specialized rehab staff were often absent from the included studies, which may affect the generalizability of the interventions described.

Declared interests

The authors declared no conflicts of interest with any financial organizations.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume the PABS protocol is a validated, ready-to-use tool. It is a proposal by the authors to standardize future research, not an established clinical instrument with proven reliability in practice.

Read it on PubMed →