AIM: To observe the effects of comprehensive rehabilitation therapy integrated with routine therapy of department of oncology on intensity of pains and quality of life in patients with advanced cancer pain. METHODS: 152 advanced cancer patients, who were treated at Department of Oncology, First Affiliated Hospital, Zhengzhou University from March 2001 to December 2004, were selected, including 96 males and 56 females, aged 35 to 72 (mean 48 +/- 14.7) years. They were assigned into observation group with 73 cases and control group with 79 cases by randomized drawing method. All the patients were treated with routine therapy at department of oncology with stable vital signs. Three steps therapy method for cancer pain suggested by world association for the study of pain and recommended by WHO were used in patients from the control group. Those in the observation group integrated treated with comprehensive rehabilitative therapy (cinesiateics, physiotherapy, relax, suggestion training and psychological treatment). Visual analogous scale (VAS) suggested by WHO was used to assess. Analgesia intensity expressed with 0 to 10, 0 point as without pain completely, 10 points as unbearable pain; Evaluation of analgesia effect: 6 to 10 points as ineffective analgesia, 3 to 5 points as effective analgesia, 0 to 2 points as optimal analgesia; The quality of life was evaluated with living quality draft for oncology patients designed in 1990. Appetite, sleeping, daily life, mental status, emotion, human communication and living pleasure, etc during rehabilitative therapy or drug therapy before and after analgesia were assessed by the patients selves (using 0 to 10 points, 0 point as non-intervention, 10 points as severe intervention). Changes of scores on pain intensity and quality of life with side effects of different therapy were observed in the two groups before and after one month. RESULTS: 152 advanced cancer patients who j oined the observation were all involved in the result analysis. (1) After therapy, scores on pain in patients from observation group and control group were lower significantly than those before therapy (2.70 +/- 1.91, 8.90 +/- 1.73, t = 3.657, p < 0.01; 4.60 +/- 1.83, 9.20 +/- 1.50, t = 2.132, p < 0.05), and it was lower in the observation group than that in the control group (t = 2.631, p < 0.01). (2) After therapy, scores on appetite, sleeping, daily life, mental status, emotion, human communication and living pleasure were lower in the patients from observation group obviously than those in the control group (4.67 +/- 1.23, 5.86 +/- 0.45; 4.62 +/- 0.73, 5.45 +/- 1.31; 4.92 +/- 0.50, 5.01 +/- 0.67; 4.81 +/- 0.61, 5.70 +/- 1.02; 4.64 +/- 1.26, 5.40 +/- 0.52; 4.61 +/- 0.63, 5.61 +/- 0.47; 4.84 +/- 1.59, 5.50 +/- 0.38; t = 2.652, 2.731, 2.807, 2.931, 2.841, 2.874, 2.933, p < 0.01). (3) There were no remarkable adverse event and side effect in the rehabilitative observation group. But there were marked side reaction: nausea, emesis, itch of skin, retention of urine, constipation and respiratory depression, etc. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive rehabilitation therapy integrated with routine therapy of oncology department has better effectiveness, safety with less side effect, can improve the quality of life index, such as: appetite, sleeping, daily life, mental status, emotion, human communication and living pleasure, etc in advanced cancer patients.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help

• PDF locator
• publisher