Long-term patient rehabilitation and quality of life after oncological endoprosthesis of long bones and joints

Background. Currently, endoprosthesis of large bones and joints is the standard of treatment for patients with tumors in the bones and joints of the upper and lower limbs and pelvis. However, the problem of integrated medical rehabilitation of these patients remains unsolved. In the postoperative period, patients frequently experience such functional abnormalities as limited mobility in the operated joint, pain, deceased locomotor activity in the joints due to prolonged bedrest leading to muscle hypotrophy. These abnormalities interfere with return to full social life affecting patients’ quality of life and making rehabilitation very important.  

Aim. To evaluate the effect of rehabilitation on patients’ quality of life and social adaptation after oncological endoprosthesis.  

Materials and methods. The study included 57 patients: 27 (47 %) males and 30 (53 %) females. Mean age was 46 years (19–71 years). In 10 patients, tumors were localized in the bones of the upper limb; in 6 patients, in the pelvic bones; in 41 patients, in the bones of the lower limb. Tumor volume varied between 24 and 3,783 cm3 (median 631 cm3 ). Pathological fractures were observed in 13 (24.5 %) patients, their risk – in 13 (24.5 %) patients. Patient activization was started at day 1–14 after surgery, passive working out of the operated limb on day 2–14. For quality of life evaluation, The Short Form-36 (SF-36) was used allowing to determine patients’ health. Functional results were analyzed using the Musculoskeletal Tumour Society score (MSTS), rehabilitation potential using the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia covering both physical and psychological components. Social status was evaluated based on patient’s occupation and social adaptation. 

Results. Performance of active rehabilitation activities after onco-orthopedic intervention allows 72 % of patients to achieve good and excellent functional results per the MSTS scale (60–97 %) under condition of protective regimen observation, as well as positively affects physical and psychological parts of quality of life. Use of Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia allows to correct psychological and/or physical parts of kinesiophobia in a timely fashion. Adequately performed rehabilitation allows 46 % of patients to remain socially active, continue working.  

Conclusion. Scale of surgical intervention, presence of pathological fracture, as well as postoperative complications, affect both functional results and quality of life of patients which in this period in most observations is higher than prior to onco-orthopedic treatment. Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia allows to evaluate patient motivation towards postoperative recovery and provide psychological help in a timely manner which decreases rehabilitation time. 

1. Балабуха О.С. Качество жизни как основа программ реабилитации онкологических больных. Международный медицинский журнал 2010;4:11–13. Balabukha O.S. Quality of life as the basis of rehabilitation programs for cancer patients. Mezhdunarodnyj medicinskij zhurnal = International Medical Journal 2010;4:11–13. (In Russ.).

2. Грушина Т.И., Тепляков В.В. Физиотерапия при ранней реабилитации больных с костными саркомами после эндопротезирования крупных костей и суставов. Физиотерапия, бальнеология и реабилитация 2018;17(4):192–8. DOI: 10.18821/1681-3456-2018-17-4-192-198 Grushina T.I., Teplyakov V.V. Physiotherapy in early rehabilitation of patients with bone sarcomas after endoprosthetics of large bones and joints. Fizioterapiya, bal'neologiya i reabilitaciya = Physiotherapy, Balneology and Rehabilitation 2018;17(4):192–8. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.18821/1681-3456-2018-17-4-192-198

3. Черкасова Е.А., Кром И.Л., Новичкова И.Ю. Медико-социологическое обоснование реабилитации онкологических больных. Социологические науки 2013;2:10–15. Cherkasova E.A., Krom I.L., Novichkova I.Yu. Medical and sociological justification of rehabilitation of cancer patients. Sociologicheskie nauki = Social Sciences 2013;2:10–15. (In Russ.).

4. Котельникова А.В., Кукшина А.А. Апробация методики измерения кинезиофобии у больных с нарушением двигательных функций. Экспериментальная психология 2018;11(2):50–62. Kotelnikova A.V., Kukshina A.A. Approbation of the method of measuring kinesiophobia in patients with impaired motor functions. Eksperimental'naya psihologiya = Experimental Psychology 2018;11(2):50–62. (In Russ.).

5. Ненарокомов А.Ю., Сперанский Д.Л., Аревшатов Э.В., Мудрый А.Ю. Современная концепция исследования качества жизни в онкологии. Фундаментальные исследования 2012;2–2:421–5. Nenarokomov A.Yu., Speransky D.L., Arevshatov E.V., Mudry A.Yu. Fundamental'nye issledovaniya = Modern concept of quality of life research in oncology. Fundamental Research 2012;2–2:421–5. (In Russ.).

6. Худошин Н.А., Абаева О.П., Романов С.В. Динамика качества жизни пациентов после тотального эндопротезирования тазобедренного сустава. Саратовский научно-медицинский журнал 2021;17(4):760–4. Khudoshin N.A., Abaeva O.P., Romanov S.V. Dynamics of quality of life of patients after total hip replacement. Saratovskij nauchno-medicinskij zhurnal = Saratov Journal of Medical Science 2021;17(4):760–4. (In Russ.).

7. Амирджанова В.Н., Горячев Д.В., Коршунов Н.И. и др. Популяционные показатели качества жизни по опроснику SF-36 (результаты многоцентрового исследования качества жизни «МИРАЖ»). Научно-практическая ревматология 2008;1:36–48. Amirdzhanova V.N., Goryachev D.V., Korshunov N.I. et al. Population indicators of quality of life according to the SF-36 questionnaire (results of the multicenter study of quality of life “Mirage”). Nauchno-prakticheskaya revmatologiya = Scientific and Practical Rheumatology 2008;1:36–48. (In Russ.).

8. Степанова А.М. Практические рекомендации по реабилитации онкоортопедических больных: обзор литературы. Физическая и реабилитационная медицина, медицинская реабилитация 2019;3:73–8. DOI: 10.36425/2658-6843-2019-3-73-78 Stepanova A.M. Practical recommendations for the rehabilitation of oncoortopedic patients: literature review. Fizicheskaya i reabilitacionnaya medicina, medicinskaya reabilitaciya = Physical and rehabilitation medicine, medical rehabilitation 2019;3:73–8. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.36425/2658-6843-2019-3-73-78

9. Ware J.Е., Snow К.К., Kosinski М., Gandek В. SF-36 Health Survey. Manuel and Interpretation Guide, Lincoln, RI. Quality Metric Incorporated, 2000. 10. Enneking W.F., Dunham W., Gebhardt M.C. et al. A system for the functional evaluation of reconstructive procedures after surgical treatment of tumors of the musculoskeletal system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1993;286:241–6.

10. Котельникова А.В., Кукшина А.А., Погонченкова И.В. и др. Практическое применение методики «Шкала Тампа» в процессе медицинской реабилитации больных с нарушением двигательных функций: Методические рекомендации. М., 2018. 21 с. Доступно по: https://niioz.ru/upload/iblock/df2/df29ff5b3f68d1de5ee7baa37fedbc77.pdf. Kotelnikova A.V., Kukshina A.A., Pogonchenkova I.V. et al. Practical application of the “Tampa Scale” technique in the process of medical rehabilitation of patients with impaired motor functions: Methodological recommendations. Moscow, 2018. 21 p. (In Russ.). Available at: https://niioz.ru/upload/iblock/df2/df29ff5b3f68d1de5ee7baa37fedbc77.p