Literature DB >> 25465378

A national snapshot of satisfaction with breast cancer procedures.

Dunya M Atisha1, Christel N Rushing, Gregory P Samsa, Tracie D Locklear, Charlie E Cox, E Shelley Hwang, Michael R Zenn, Andrea L Pusic, Amy P Abernethy.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Women with early-stage breast cancer face the complex decision to undergo one of three equally effective oncologic surgical strategies: breast-conservation surgery with radiation (BCS), mastectomy, or mastectomy with breast reconstruction. With comparable oncologic outcomes and survival rates, evaluations of satisfaction with these procedures are needed to facilitate the decision-making process and to optimize long-term health.
METHODS: Women recruited from the Army of Women with a history of breast cancer surgery took electronically administered surgery-specific surveys, including the BREAST-Q© and a background survey evaluating patient-, disease-, and procedure-specific factors. Descriptive statistics and regression analysis were used to evaluate the effect of procedure type on breast satisfaction scores.
RESULTS: Overall, 7,619 women completed the questionnaires. Linear regression revealed that women who underwent abdominal flap, or buttock or thigh flap reconstruction reported the highest breast satisfaction score, scoring an average of 5.6 points and 14.4 points higher than BCS, respectively (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.027, respectively). No difference in satisfaction was observed in women who underwent latissimus dorsi flap reconstruction compared with those who underwent BCS. Women who underwent implant reconstruction reported scores 8.6 points lower than BCS (p < 0.0001). Those with mastectomies without reconstruction or complex surgical histories scored, on average, 10 points lower than BCS (p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: Women who underwent autologous tissue reconstruction reported the highest breast satisfaction, while women undergoing mastectomy without reconstruction reported the lowest satisfaction. These findings emphasize the value of patient-reported outcome measures as an important guide to decision making in breast surgery and underscore the importance of multidisciplinary participation early in the surgical decision-making process.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25465378     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-4246-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  39 in total

1.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Breast Reconstruction Options in the Setting of Postmastectomy Radiotherapy Using the BREAST-Q.

Authors:  Shantanu N Razdan; Peter G Cordeiro; Claudia R Albornoz; Teresa Ro; Wess A Cohen; Babak J Mehrara; Colleen M McCarthy; Joseph J Disa; Andrea L Pusic; Evan Matros
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.730

2.  Breast Cancer and Reconstruction: Normative Data for Interpreting the BREAST-Q.

Authors:  Lily R Mundy; Karen Homa; Anne F Klassen; Andrea L Pusic; Carolyn L Kerrigan
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 3.  Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) following mastectomy with breast reconstruction or without reconstruction: a systematic review.

Authors:  Leonardo Z Cordova; David J Hunter-Smith; Warren M Rozen
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2019-08

4.  Patient-Reported Outcomes 1 Year After Immediate Breast Reconstruction: Results of the Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium Study.

Authors:  Andrea L Pusic; Evan Matros; Neil Fine; Edward Buchel; Gayle M Gordillo; Jennifer B Hamill; Hyungjin M Kim; Ji Qi; Claudia Albornoz; Anne F Klassen; Edwin G Wilkins
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Multicenter Comparison of Four Abdominally Based Autologous Reconstruction Methods.

Authors:  Sheina A Macadam; Toni Zhong; Katie Weichman; Michael Papsdorf; Peter A Lennox; Alexes Hazen; Evan Matros; Joseph Disa; Babak Mehrara; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.730

6.  Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and its impact on quality of life.

Authors:  Tina J Hieken; Judy C Boughey
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2016-08

7.  Validation of the electronic version of the BREAST-Q in the army of women study.

Authors:  Sarah Fuzesi; Stefan J Cano; Anne F Klassen; Dunya Atisha; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2017-03-07       Impact factor: 4.380

8.  Evaluation of Long-Term Satisfaction with Breast Surgery in Patients Treated for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Population-Based Longitudinal Cohort Study.

Authors:  Devon Livingston-Rosanoff; Amy Trentham-Dietz; John M Hampton; Polly A Newcomb; Lee G Wilke
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-02-24       Impact factor: 5.344

9.  Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: Challenging Considerations for the Surgeon.

Authors:  Peter Angelos; Isabelle Bedrosian; David M Euhus; Virginia M Herrmann; Steven J Katz; Andrea Pusic
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-08-11       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 10.  The BREAST-Q in surgical research: A review of the literature 2009-2015.

Authors:  Wess A Cohen; Lily R Mundy; Tiffany N S Ballard; Anne Klassen; Stefan J Cano; John Browne; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg       Date:  2015-11-26       Impact factor: 2.740

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.