Kathy Flitcroft1, Meagan Brennan2, Daniel Costa3, Andrew Spillane4. 1. Breast & Surgical Oncology at the Poche Centre, 40 Rocklands Rd, North Sydney, NSW, 2060, Australia; Northern Clinical School, University of Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia. Electronic address: kathy.flitcroft@melanoma.org.au. 2. Breast & Surgical Oncology at the Poche Centre, 40 Rocklands Rd, North Sydney, NSW, 2060, Australia; Northern Clinical School, University of Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia. Electronic address: meagan.brennan@sydney.edu.au. 3. Pain Management Research Unit, University of Sydney at Royal North Shore Hospital, Reserve Rd, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia. Electronic address: daniel.costa@sydney.edu.au. 4. Breast & Surgical Oncology at the Poche Centre, 40 Rocklands Rd, North Sydney, NSW, 2060, Australia; Northern Clinical School, University of Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia; Mater Hospital, Rocklands Rd, North Sydney, NSW, 2060, Australia; Royal North Shore Hospital, Reserve Rd, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia. Electronic address: andrew.spillane@melanoma.org.au.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Differences in national health data collection systems preclude accurate assessments of how much breast reconstruction (BR) is performed in Australia. This paper aims to quantitatively document and visually map the national prevalence and distribution of BR, using the best available evidence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Quantitative analysis and spatial mapping of hospital-level data on BR prevalence in all six Australian states and two mainland territories. Data was extracted on 3786 women, under the care of members of Breast Surgeons of Australia and New Zealand Incorporated, who had mastectomy for breast malignancy with or without post-mastectomy BR in 2013. RESULTS: Analysis revealed a national BR rate of 18.3%. Statistically significant differences in BR uptake (p < .0001) were found between jurisdictions [χ2 (df = 7) = 284.29], with BR more likely in younger women [χ2 (df = 14) = 395.62] and in private hospitals (χ2 = 63.99) and less likely in remote areas [χ2 (df = 4) = 66.49]. CONCLUSION: Analysis of this substantial subset of Australian women requiring mastectomy for breast cancer has demonstrated significant variation in provision or uptake of BR across four important variables. As BR has been shown to provide long-term survivorship benefits for the growing number of women living longer following mastectomy for breast cancer, there is an urgent need to ensure BR is accessible and affordable for all women who choose this option.
INTRODUCTION: Differences in national health data collection systems preclude accurate assessments of how much breast reconstruction (BR) is performed in Australia. This paper aims to quantitatively document and visually map the national prevalence and distribution of BR, using the best available evidence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Quantitative analysis and spatial mapping of hospital-level data on BR prevalence in all six Australian states and two mainland territories. Data was extracted on 3786 women, under the care of members of Breast Surgeons of Australia and New Zealand Incorporated, who had mastectomy for breast malignancy with or without post-mastectomy BR in 2013. RESULTS: Analysis revealed a national BR rate of 18.3%. Statistically significant differences in BR uptake (p < .0001) were found between jurisdictions [χ2 (df = 7) = 284.29], with BR more likely in younger women [χ2 (df = 14) = 395.62] and in private hospitals (χ2 = 63.99) and less likely in remote areas [χ2 (df = 4) = 66.49]. CONCLUSION: Analysis of this substantial subset of Australian women requiring mastectomy for breast cancer has demonstrated significant variation in provision or uptake of BR across four important variables. As BR has been shown to provide long-term survivorship benefits for the growing number of women living longer following mastectomy for breast cancer, there is an urgent need to ensure BR is accessible and affordable for all women who choose this option.
Authors: Paramita Dasgupta; Peter D Baade; Danny R Youlden; Gail Garvey; Joanne F Aitken; Isabella Wallington; Jennifer Chynoweth; Helen Zorbas; Philippa H Youl Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-04-29 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: E Heeg; M B Jensen; M A M Mureau; B Ejlertsen; R A E M Tollenaar; P M Christiansen; M T F D Vrancken Peeters Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2020-06-10 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Yingyu Feng; Kathy Flitcroft; Marina T van Leeuwen; Adam G Elshaug; Andrew Spillane; Sallie-Anne Pearson Journal: ANZ J Surg Date: 2019-08-16 Impact factor: 1.872