Literature DB >> 16217470

Standardized assessment of breast cancer surgical scars integrating the Vancouver Scar Scale, Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, and patients' perspectives.

Pauline T Truong1, Freddy Abnousi, Celina M Yong, Allen Hayashi, James A Runkel, Theressa Phillips, Ivo A Olivotto.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no standardized, comprehensive method to assess surgical scars after breast cancer surgery. This article evaluates the application of the Vancouver Scar Scale, in conjunction with patients' scar self-rating and scar-related pain, in a cohort of breast cancer patients.
METHODS: Data were prospectively collected in 59 women with breast cancer. Scar assessment comprised: 1. objective rating by pairs of independent observers using the Vancouver Scar Scale; 2. patient's ratings of the scar's physical parameters and overall satisfaction; and 3. pain assessment using the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire. A total of 212 scar scores (59 pairs of breast/chest wall and 47 pairs of axillary scar scores) were generated by 13 observers: three physicians, five radiation therapists, and five nurses. Internal consistency was tested using Cronbach's alpha statistics. Interobserver reliability was evaluated with Spearman's rho and intraclass correlation coefficient computations. Convergent validity of the observer and patient ratings was examined with Spearman's correlation statistics. Linear regression analysis was performed to identify significant factors associated with Vancouver Scar Scale scores and patient satisfaction.
RESULTS: The Vancouver Scar Scale, patient self-rating scale, and Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire had acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.79, 0.64, and 0.72 respectively). Interobserver reliability using the Vancouver Scar Scale was significant with Spearman's correlation coefficients of 0.53 for pliability, 0.47 for scar height, 0.49 for vascularity, 0.54 for pigmentation, and 0.66 for overall score (all p values < 0.001). Significant agreement between observer and patient ratings of scar pliability (p = 0.01) and color (p = 0.001) was demonstrated. Mild to moderate pain was reported by more than 40 percent of patients. Patient satisfaction was significantly associated with self-rating of scar pliability and pain, but not Vancouver Scar Scale scores.
CONCLUSIONS: The Vancouver Scar Scale is a reliable and valid tool to objectively evaluate scars after breast cancer surgery. Evaluation of scar-related pain and patients' scar rating and satisfaction provide additional information relevant to scar assessment. This integrated approach is feasible in a busy clinical setting to advance care and research in scar management for breast cancer patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16217470     DOI: 10.1097/01.prs.0000181520.87883.94

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0032-1052            Impact factor:   4.730


  15 in total

1.  Towards quantifying the aesthetic outcomes of breast cancer treatment: comparison of clinical photography and colorimetry.

Authors:  Min Soon Kim; William N Rodney; Tara Cooper; Chris Kite; Gregory P Reece; Mia K Markey
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.431

2.  A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating a Cx43-Mimetic Peptide in Cutaneous Scarring.

Authors:  Christina L Grek; Jade Montgomery; Meenakshi Sharma; A Ravi; J S Rajkumar; Kurtis E Moyer; Robert G Gourdie; Gautam S Ghatnekar
Journal:  J Invest Dermatol       Date:  2016-11-14       Impact factor: 8.551

3.  Retrospective observational cohort study on cosmetic outcome of using Ti-Ni memory alloy wire for intradermal suture following mastectomy in patients with breast cancer.

Authors:  Gang Li; Sida Qin; Xin Sun; Jiansheng Wang; Yunfeng Zhang; Jia Zhang; Jing Zhang; Shou-Ching Tang; Hong Ren
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2017-12-13       Impact factor: 2.967

4.  Comparison of Intralesional Triamcinolone Acetonide, 5-Fluorouracil, and Their Combination for the Treatment of Keloids.

Authors:  Sunil Srivastava; Aditya Nanasaheb Patil; Chaitra Prakash; Hiranmayi Kumari
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2017-11-01       Impact factor: 4.730

5.  Noninvasive tissue adhesive for cardiac implantable electronic device pocket closure: the TAPE pilot study.

Authors:  S M Koerber; T Loethen; M Turagam; J Payne; R Weachter; G Flaker; M R Gold; S Gautam
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2018-10-15       Impact factor: 1.900

6.  Quantifying the aesthetic outcomes of breast cancer treatment: assessment of surgical scars from clinical photographs.

Authors:  Min Soon Kim; William N Rodney; Gregory P Reece; Elisabeth K Beahm; Melissa A Crosby; Mia K Markey
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2010-07-13       Impact factor: 2.431

Review 7.  Surgical Outcomes Following Mohs Micrographic Surgery for Basal Cell Carcinoma on the Distal Third of the Nose.

Authors:  Lisa Faye Fronek; David Dorton
Journal:  J Clin Aesthet Dermatol       Date:  2022-06

8.  Translation of the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS) to French with cross-cultural adaptation, reliability evaluation and validation.

Authors:  Valérie Deslauriers; Dominique M Rouleau; Ghassan Alami; Joy C MacDermid
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 2.089

9.  Reliability and validity of the Turkish version short-form McGill pain questionnaire in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Yavuz Yakut; Edibe Yakut; Kiliçhan Bayar; Fatma Uygur
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2006-11-15       Impact factor: 3.650

10.  Increased burn healing time is associated with higher Vancouver Scar Scale score.

Authors:  Vidya Finlay; Sally Burrows; Maddison Burmaz; Hussna Yawary; Johanna Lee; Dale W Edgar; Fiona M Wood
Journal:  Scars Burn Heal       Date:  2017-03-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.