Objective: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the level of evidence of contemporary peer‐reviewed literature published from 2004 to 2011 on the psychosocial impact of lymphedema.Methods: Eleven electronic databases were searched and 1311 articles retrieved; 23 met inclusion criteria. Twelve articles utilized qualitative methodology and 11 used quantitative methodology. An established quality assessment tool was used to assess the quality of the included studies.Results: The overall quality of the 23 included studies was adequate. A critical limitation of current literature is the lack of conceptual or operational definitions for the concept of psychosocial impact. Quantitative studies showed statistically significant poorer social well‐being in persons with lymphedema, including perceptions related to body image, appearance, sexuality, and social barriers. No statistically significant differences were found between persons with and without lymphedema in the domains of emotional well‐being (happy or sad) and psychological distress (depression and anxiety). All 12 of the qualitative studies consistently described negative psychological impact (negative self‐identity, emotional disturbance, and psychological distress) and negative social impact (marginalization, financial burden, perceived diminished sexuality, social isolation, perceived social abandonment, public insensitivity, and non‐supportive work environment). Factors associated with psychosocial impact were also identified.Conclusions: Lymphedema has a negative psychosocial impact on affected individuals. The current review sheds light on the conceptualization and operationalization of the definitions of psychosocial impact with respect to lymphedema. Development of a lymphedema‐specific instrument is needed to better characterize the impact of lymphedema and to examine the factors contributing to these outcomes in cancer and non‐cancer‐related populations. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Breast cancer-related lymphedema: Symptoms, diagnosis, risk reduction, and management

Many breast cancer survivors have coexistent chronic diseases or comorbidities at the time of their cancer diagnosis. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the association of comorbidities on breast cancer survivors’ quality of life. A prospective design was used to recruit 140 women before cancer surgery, 134 women completed the study. Comorbidities were assessed using self-report and verified by medical record review and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) before and 12-month after cancer surgery. Quality of life was evaluated using Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36 v2). Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, t-tests, Fisher’s exact test, and correlations were performed for data analysis. A total of 28 comorbidities were identified. Among the 134 patients, 73.8% had at least one of the comorbidities, 54.7% had 2–4, and only 7.4% had 5–8. Comorbidities did not change at 12 months after surgery. Numbers of comorbidities by patients’ self-report and weighted categorization of comorbidities by CCI had a similar negative correlation with overall quality of life scores as well as domains of general health, physical functioning, bodily pain, and vitality. Comorbidities, specifically hypertension, arthritis, and diabetes, were associated with poorer quality of life in multiple domains among breast cancer survivors. Future research should consider the combined influence of comorbidity and cancer on patients’ quality of life.

Precision health refers to personalized healthcare based on a person's unique genetic, genomic, or omic composition within the context of lifestyle, social, economic, cultural and environmental influences to help individuals achieve well-being and optimal health. Precision health utilizes big data sets that combine omics (i.e. genomic sequence, protein, metabolite, and microbiome information) with clinical information and health outcomes to optimize disease diagnosis, treatment and prevention specific to each patient. Successful implementation of precision health requires interprofessional collaboration, community outreach efforts, and coordination of care, a mission that nurses are well-positioned to lead. Despite the surge of interest and attention to precision health, most nurses are not well-versed in precision health or its implications for the nursing profession. Based on a critical analysis of literature and expert opinions, this paper provides an overview of precision health and the importance of engaging the nursing profession for its implementation. Other topics reviewed in this paper include big data and omics, information science, integration of family health history in precision health, and nursing omics research in symptom science. The paper concludes with recommendations for nurse leaders in research, education, clinical practice, nursing administration and policy settings for which to develop strategic plans to implement precision health.