Hopefully, by the time this editor's message arrives online and in your mailboxes, the Oncology Section and profession will be celebrating oncology clinical specialization as the newest specialization approved by the House of Delegates (HOD).1 This is the culmination of a 7-year effort of the section, although ABPTS states we made it through the process in record time, as the time from submission of the formal petition for specialization to ABPTS to passage of the motion at the HOD was approximately 3½ years. The first 3½ years were spent developing the survey of practice, conducting the survey, and writing the petition.
MAKE NO MISTAKE—this is a major change in cancer rehabilitation. This generation of therapists needs to meet the many challenges this chronic disease and its treatment present to our current health care system to obtain the best possible outcomes for these survivors. By 2024, there are projected to be 14 million cancer survivors in the United States.2 Already in some states, cancer has become the leading cause of death and has been the leading cause of morbidity for quite some time. There is no doubt these clinical specialists will rise to this challenge, given the history of the profession dating back to 1976 when the APTA Task Force on Clinical Specialization was created and clinical specialists were approved in 1978.3 Clinical specialists have improved practice outcomes and enhanced evidence for practice, and they teach in large numbers in our professional education programs. Oncology physical therapy will never be the same, and I look forward to the first cohort of oncology physical therapist clinical specialists. There is significant work still ahead to create the examination and oversee the process. However, it is time to CELEBRATE on behalf of our profession and, more importantly, on the improvement in clinical outcomes for survivors these specialists will bring.
This issue continues the journal's commitment to publish the EDGE Task Force Systematic Reviews of Clinical Outcomes since 2013.4 The EDGE systematic reviews describe existing measures that are currently valid and clinically useful in cancer populations, or measures that require validation or further validation in the cancer population, as well as identification of areas where clinically relevant measures are still quite inadequate and should not be used. This EDGE systematic review by Davies et al5 is on clinical outcome measures of functional mobility in prostate cancer survivors.
The other original research articles in this issue are a preliminary report on the use of mirror therapy in pediatric oncology,6 whereas the second article addresses the “Psychometric Properties of the Modified Brief Fatigue Inventory and FACIT-Fatigue in Individuals With Cancer of the Head and Neck.”7 Mirror therapy intervention outcomes for pediatric cancer survivors have not been published, and this intervention may provide a new tool in your toolbox for pediatric oncology clinical practice. The case report on “Manual Lymph Drainage (MLD) and Fascial Release for the Treatment of Chylous Ascites Following Radical Nephrectomy” is a novel use of MLD and fascial release techniques.8
The clinical conversation column continues the theme of pediatric oncology, the first column from the Pediatric Oncology Special Interest Group submitted by their Chair, Susan Miale, whereas the Research Round-up column, titled “Exercise Training and Cancer: Recognizing What We May Not Know,” asks us to ponder the evidence for exercise training in practice as we translate knowledge to practice.9 For those of you looking for a new method to measure upper limb, breast, or truncal edema, read the Technical Note/Industry News on the MoistureMeter D sold by Delfin.10 The MoistureMeter D may be another measurement tool in your toolbox, given the challenge of measuring lymphedema accurately in clinical practice and research.
Finally, the programming, activities, and oncology research at PT NEXT 2016 are informative and there is nothing as energizing and fun as the Oxford debate. It will be great to see so many old and new friends at the section booth. As always, if you are interested in reviewing for the journal, please e-mail me at email@example.com. I have received positive feedback on the journal and journal Webpage with our new publisher, and I look forward to more feedback on how we may continue to improve the journal and journal Webpage; please send that feedback to firstname.lastname@example.org. If you have not yet visited the journal Webpage, please do so and check out the collections tab—it may save you some valuable time searching for outcome measures and evidence for practice.
It is summer in Michigan; time to take advantage of the outdoor activities summer affords us such as golf and boating. I hope you get to enjoy some stress-reducing activities over the summer, or a wonderful vacation.
2. DeSantis CE, Lin CC, Mariotto AB. Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64(4):252–271.
4. Levangie PK, Fisher MI. Oncology Section Task Force on Breast Cancer Outcomes: an introduction to the EDGE Task Force and clinical measures of upper extremity function. Rehabil Oncol. 2013;31(1):6–10.
5. Davies CC, Colon G, Geyer H, Pfalzer LA, Fisher MI. Oncology EDGE Task Force on Prostate Cancer Outcomes: a systematic review of outcome measures for functional mobility. Rehabil Oncol. 2016;34(3):82–96.
6. Anghelescu DL, Kelly CN, Steen BD, et al. Mirror therapy for phantom limb pain at a pediatric oncology institution. Rehabil Oncol. 2016;34(3):104–110.
7. Eden MM, Kunkel K. Psychometric properties of the Modified Brief Fatigue Inventory and FACIT-Fatigue in individuals with cancer of the head and neck. Rehabil Oncol. 2016;34(3):97–103.
8. Kramp ME. Manual lymph drainage and fascial release for the treatment of chylous ascites following radical nephrectomy: a case report. Rehabil Oncol. 2016;34(3):111–114.
9. Morris GS. Exercise training and cancer: recognizing what we may not know. Rehabil Oncol. 2016;34(3):115–116.
10. Harrington S. Technical Note/Industry News. MoistureMeter D and MoistureMeter D Compact. Rehabil Oncol. 2016;34(3):120–121.