Objective:To understand the management status of breast cancer-related lymphedema, and to provide a basis for the formulation of prevention and treatment plans for breast cancer-related lymphedema.Methods:Using accidental sampling, a questionnaire designed by the research team was used to survey nurses in 58 hospitals in Jiangsu Province.Results:This study surveyed a total of 58 hospitals, of which 53 were general hospitals and 5 specialized hospitals. Only 11 hospitals (18.97%) had treatment rooms dedicated to conservative treatment of lymphedema, 9 hospitals (15.52%) had opened lymphedema clinics, and 15 hospitals (25.86%) had professional international lymphedema therapists. All the 58 hospitals had different degrees of prevention and management of breast cancer-related lymphedema.Conclusions:The comprehensive management of lymphedema has not yet been achieved, and the management standards of lymphedema also need to be further improved. It is important to establish a unified and standardized management plan and practice standards.

Objective: To translate the English version of the Pressure Ulcer Risk Primary or Secondary Evaluation Tool (PURPOSE T) into Chinese and evaluate its reliability and validity. Methods: Firstly, PURPOSE T was translated and revised, cross-cultural debugging, and then 213 inpatients from Jiangsu University Affiliated Hospital from November 2017 to May 2018 were selected for investigation. Choosing the total item content validity index (S-CVI/Ave) and the content validity of the item level content validity index (I-CVI) to evaluate content validity, using the Chinese version of the Braden scale as the criterion to measure the validity-related validity of the Chinese version of PURPOSE T. The internal consistency reliability Cronbach α coefficient, the assessor reliability, and the test-retest reliability measure the reliability. Results: The Chinese version of PURPOSET S-CVI was 0.967; I-CVI was 0.6-1.0, The coefficients between PURPOSET and Braden scale in mobility, activity ability, perception status, nutritional status and humidity were 0.600, 0.661, 0.699, 0.519, and 0.783. The PURPOSET and Braden scales had a correlation coefficient of 0.407 in predicting the risk of pressure injury. The Cronbach α=0.859 of the evaluation tool, the assessor reliability were 0.87 and the correlation coefficient of the 2 measurements of the test-retest reliability were 0.91. Conclusions The Chinese version of PURPOSET has good reliability and validity and can be used as a risk assessment tool for pressure injury in hospitalized patients in China.