PTSystematic ReviewDisability and rehabilitation2024

The effectiveness and safety of heat/cold therapy in adults with lymphoedema: systematic review.

J E Hill, J C Whitaker, N Sharafi and 4 others

PMID 37431170

WHAT IT FOUND

Heat at 39-42 °C for long sessions (1200-3600 minutes total) reduced limb circumference and volume in studies of lymphoedema, but most were small, unblinded before-and-after studies with no control group.

The reviewers make no recommendation for practice.

Key findings

01All five microwave studies reported improvement in limb circumference and limb volume from before to after treatment, with three and four of the five respectively reaching statistical significance.

02Most included studies were at risk of bias: nine of the 11 before-and-after studies were judged low quality, one of the four non-randomised controlled trials was low quality, and three of the four randomised trials were at high risk of bias.

03Cold therapy had only two studies behind it, and the reviewers conclude that no recommendation for practice can be made for either heat or cold therapy.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

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

Almost all the studies measured people before and after treatment without a control group, so the reviewers cannot tell whether the swelling improved because of the heat or cold, because of the other treatments given at the same time, or on its own. Only two before-and-after studies, three non-randomised controlled studies and one randomised trial were judged at low risk of bias, and the reviewers note that poor reporting made many studies hard to judge. Because the studies were so different, the reviewers counted how many reported improvement instead of pooling the results. This gives no estimate of how much improvement to expect, takes no account of how big or how good each study was, and cannot assess inconsistency, imprecision or publication bias. No outcome was required for inclusion, so studies measured different things and the reviewers could not compare them directly. Screening of titles and abstracts was done by one reviewer, and full-paper screening, data extraction and quality assessment were done by one reviewer and only checked by a second rather than independently. Three papers could not be obtained at all. The search was run on 22 March 2023 and only three relevant papers were published in the decade before it, so the review will date. Most studies took place in hospitals, laboratories or outpatient clinics with controlled temperatures and long supervised treatment periods, so it is unclear whether any benefit would carry over to self-management at home. Most studies looked at lymphoedema of the legs, so there is less certainty about the arms and less still about cold therapy.

Declared interests

The review was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration North West Coast, with additional funding from the University MedTech Solutions Group. No conflicts of interest are stated in the text provided. Neither funder is described as having designed the review or written it up.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read the improvements in limb circumference and limb volume as proof that heat therapy works for lymphoedema. Almost all of the studies measured people before and after treatment with no control group, so the swelling could have improved for other reasons or because of the other treatments given at the same time, and the reviewers themselves conclude that no recommendation for practice can be made.

Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →