Engin Onur, Akalın Elif, Sarıbay Efe, Aslan Ceren, Şahin Ebru, Alper Serap
Karadeniz Eregli State Hospital, Zonguldak,Turkey.
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Dokuz Eylul University Hospital, İzmir, Turkey.
Lymphat Res Biol. 2019 Oct;17(5):543-549. doi: 10.1089/lrb.2018.0040. Epub 2019 Feb 14.
The standard volumeter is heavy and fragile, and using the same volumeter for different patients can result in hygiene problems. These disadvantages point to the need for the development of a new model of volumeter. The new volumeter put forward in this study is lighter, smaller, sturdier, and easier to clean, while also having its own scale. In this study, the validity of this newly designed volumeter is investigated. In the first step, the volume of standard cylinders was measured thrice using a standard volumeter and an easy-measurement volumeter, after which a total of 30 arm volumes of 15 volunteers were measured. In the final stage, the arms of 28 patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema were measured once with both volumeters and the mean results were compared. There was a high degree of consistency between the measured volumes of cylinders of known volume when measured with a standard volumeter and the "Easy volumeter." The measured mean volumes with the two volumeters were assessed with paired sample -test, resulting in a significance ( value) of 0.927, indicating no difference between the measurements of the two volumeters. The variance of measurement of the devices was assessed with a Levene's test, and the significance ( value) was obtained as 0.981. Based on this result, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected, meaning that there is no difference in the variances of measurements of the two volumeters. Likewise, a paired sample -test was used to evaluate the differences between the mean measurements of the healthy volunteers group, and no difference was detected between the mean arm volumes measured with each volumeter (significance=0.105). The measurements between the two volumeters were also consistent in the lymphedema patient group (involved arm significance = 0.842 and normal arm significance = 0.075). Our study revealed the validity of the newly designed "Easy Volumeter" for the measurement of arm volumes, indicating its appropriateness for use in daily practice.
标准体积计笨重且易碎，对不同患者使用同一体积计会导致卫生问题。这些缺点表明需要开发一种新型体积计。本研究提出的新型体积计更轻、更小、更坚固且更易于清洁，同时还有自身的刻度。在本研究中，对这种新设计的体积计的有效性进行了调查。第一步，使用标准体积计和简易测量体积计对标准量筒的体积进行三次测量，之后对15名志愿者的30个手臂体积进行测量。在最后阶段，用两种体积计对28例乳腺癌相关淋巴水肿患者的手臂各测量一次，并比较平均结果。用标准体积计和“简易体积计”测量已知体积量筒的测量体积之间具有高度一致性。用配对样本检验评估两种体积计测量的平均体积，显著性（p值）为0.927，表明两种体积计的测量结果无差异。用Levene检验评估设备测量的方差，显著性（p值）为0.981。基于此结果，不能拒绝原假设，即两种体积计测量的方差无差异。同样，用配对样本检验评估健康志愿者组平均测量值之间的差异，每种体积计测量的平均手臂体积之间未检测到差异（显著性=0.105）。在淋巴水肿患者组中，两种体积计的测量结果也一致（患侧手臂显著性=0.842，健侧手臂显著性=0.075）。我们的研究揭示了新设计的“简易体积计”用于测量手臂体积的有效性，表明其适用于日常实践。
