The agreement between three classification systems used to grade the severity of lymphedema in patients with upper and lower extremity lymphedema: A retrospective study

ABSTRACT

Background

Several classification systems are used to grade the severity of lymphedema. Their agreement with each other has not been reported.

Objective

To evaluate the agreement between the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) criteria, the criteria of Ramos et al., and the International Society of Lymphology (ISL) criteria in patients with upper and lower extremity lymphedema.

Methods

A total of 156 patients (63 and 93 patients with upper and lower extremity lymphedema, respectively) were included. The circumference measurements and limb volume were measured. The severity of lymphedema of the patients was classified as mild, moderate, and severe lymphedema using the APTA criteria, the criteria of Ramos et al., and the ISL criteria. The agreement between the classification systems was assessed with Krippendorff’s alpha.

Results

An acceptable and poor agreement were found between the criteria in upper (Krippendorff’s alpha > 0.667) and lower extremity lymphedema (Krippendorff’s alpha < 0.667), respectively. In pairwise comparisons, an acceptable agreement was found among each comparison in upper extremity lymphedema (Krippendorff’s alpha > 0.667), and a poor agreement was found among each comparison in lower extremity lymphedema (Krippendorff’s alpha < 0.667) except between the APTA criteria and the criteria of Ramos et al (Krippendorff’s alpha > 0.667).

Conclusions

Patients with upper extremity lymphedema classified according to these criteria can be assumed to be samples of the same population; however, patients with lower extremity lymphedema graded according to the ISL criteria may be included in a different classification when they grade with the APTA criteria and the criteria of Ramos et al.

KEYWORDS:

• Lymphedema
• upper extremity
• lower extremity
• outcome assessment
• classification

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.