Literature DB >> 28279888

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

Sarah Fuzesi1, Stefan J Cano2, Anne F Klassen3, Dunya Atisha4, Andrea L Pusic5.   

Abstract

Women undergoing surgery for primary breast cancer can choose between breast conserving therapy and mastectomy (with or without breast reconstruction). Patients often turn to outcomes data to help guide the decision-making process. The BREAST-Q is a validated breast surgery-specific patient-reported outcome measure that evaluates satisfaction, quality of life, and patient experience. It was originally developed for paper-and-pencil administration. However, the BREAST-Q has increasingly been administered electronically. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of an electronic version of the BREAST-Q in a large online survey. Women with a history of breast cancer surgery recruited from the Love/AVON Army of Women program completed an electronic version of the BREAST-Q in addition to the Impact of Cancer Survey and PTSD Checklist. Traditional psychometric analyses were performed on the collected data. BREAST-Q data were collected from 6748 women (3497 Breast Conserving Therapy module, 1295 Mastectomy module, 1956 Breast Reconstruction module). Acceptability was supported by a high response rate (82%), low frequency of missing data (<5%), and maximum endorsement frequencies (<80%) in all but 17 items. Scale reliability was supported by high Cronbach's α coefficients (≥0.78) and item-total correlations (range of means, 0.65-0.91). Validity was supported by interscale correlations, convergent and divergent hypotheses as well as clinical hypotheses. The electronically administered BREAST-Q yields highly reliable, clinically meaningful data for use in clinical outcomes research. The BREAST-Q can be used in the clinical setting, whether administered electronically or using paper-and-pencil, at the choice of the patient and surgeon.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BREAST-Q; Breast surgery; Electronic questionnaires; PROMS; Patient reported outcome measures; Patient reported outcomes; Psychometrics

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28279888      PMCID: PMC5551502          DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2017.02.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast        ISSN: 0960-9776            Impact factor:   4.380


  26 in total

1.  The equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil psychological instruments: implications for measures of negative affect.

Authors:  S E Schulenberg; B A Yutrzenka
Journal:  Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput       Date:  1999-05

2.  The BREAST-Q: further validation in independent clinical samples.

Authors:  Stefan J Cano; Anne F Klassen; Amie M Scott; Peter G Cordeiro; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.730

3.  Partnering with engaged patients accelerates research.

Authors:  Dunya M Atisha; Tracie D Locklear; Ursula A Rogers; Christel N Rushing; Gregory P Samsa; Amy P Abernethy
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2013-12-11       Impact factor: 3.454

4.  Assessing the impact of cancer: development of a new instrument for long-term survivors.

Authors:  Brad J Zebrack; Patricia A Ganz; Coen A Bernaards; Laura Petersen; Laura Abraham
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 3.894

5.  Does patient satisfaction with breast reconstruction change over time? Two-year results of the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcomes Study.

Authors:  Amy K Alderman; Latoya E Kuhn; Julie C Lowery; Edwin G Wilkins
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2006-11-16       Impact factor: 6.113

6.  Effects of radiotherapy and surgery in early breast cancer. An overview of the randomized trials.

Authors: 
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1995-11-30       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  The Patient Outcomes of Surgery-Hand/Arm (POS-Hand/Arm): a new patient-based outcome measure.

Authors:  S J Cano; J P Browne; D L Lamping; A H N Roberts; D A McGrouther; N A Black
Journal:  J Hand Surg Br       Date:  2004-10

8.  The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study.

Authors:  Lidwine B Mokkink; Caroline B Terwee; Donald L Patrick; Jordi Alonso; Paul W Stratford; Dirk L Knol; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 9.  Measuring quality of life in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery: a systematic review of patient-reported outcomes instruments.

Authors:  Andrea L Pusic; Constance M Chen; Stefan Cano; Anne Klassen; Colleen McCarthy; E Dale Collins; Peter G Cordeiro
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2007-09-15       Impact factor: 4.730

10.  Survival after lumpectomy and mastectomy for early stage invasive breast cancer: the effect of age and hormone receptor status.

Authors:  E Shelley Hwang; Daphne Y Lichtensztajn; Scarlett Lin Gomez; Barbara Fowble; Christina A Clarke
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-01-28       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcome Measures into Breast Surgical Oncology: Advancing Toward Value-Based Care.

Authors:  Mirelle Lagendijk; Elizabeth Mittendorf; Tari A King; Christopher Gibbons; Andrea Pusic; Laura S Dominici
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2019-12-17

2.  Effect of laser therapy on quality of life in patients with radiation-induced breast telangiectasias.

Authors:  Anthony M Rossi; Nina R Blank; Kishwer Nehal; Stephen Dusza; Erica H Lee
Journal:  Lasers Surg Med       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 4.025

3.  Breast cancer patient-reported outcomes on level 1 and level 2 oncoplastic procedures using BREAST-Q®.

Authors:  C A Pinto; B Peleteiro; C S Pinto; F Osório; S Costa; A Magalhães; H Mora; J Amaral; D Gonçalves; J L Fougo
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2022-07-29       Impact factor: 4.322

4.  Development and Validation of the BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module.

Authors:  Anne F Klassen; Laura Dominici; Sarah Fuzesi; Stefan J Cano; Dunya Atisha; Tracie Locklear; Madelijn L Gregorowitsch; Elena Tsangaris; Monica Morrow; Tari King; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 5.344

5.  Patient-reported outcome after oncoplastic breast surgery compared with conventional breast-conserving surgery in breast cancer.

Authors:  Michael Rose; Henry Svensson; Jürgen Handler; Ute Hoyer; Anita Ringberg; Jonas Manjer
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020-01-27       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Systematic and continuous collection of patient-reported outcomes and experience in women with cancer undergoing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: a study protocol for the Tuscany Region (Italy).

Authors:  Francesca Ferrè; Sabina De Rosis; Anna Maria Murante; Kendall Jamieson Gilmore; Matteo Ghilli; Donatella Mariniello; Sabina Nuti; Manuela Roncella
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 7.  Systematic Review of Breast-Q: A Tool to Evaluate Post-Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

Authors:  Ishith Seth; Nimish Seth; Gabriella Bulloch; Warren M Rozen; David J Hunter-Smith
Journal:  Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press)       Date:  2021-12-16

8.  Moving towards patient-reported outcomes in routine clinical practice: implementation lessons from the BREAST-Q.

Authors:  Jonas A Nelson; Jacqueline J Chu; Stefan Dabic; Elizabeth O Kenworthy; Meghana G Shamsunder; Colleen M McCarthy; Babak J Mehrara; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2022-08-16       Impact factor: 3.440

9.  Long-Term Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life After Breast-Conserving Therapy: A Prospective Study Using the BREAST-Q.

Authors:  Ilona Stolpner; Jörg Heil; Fabian Riedel; Markus Wallwiener; Benedikt Schäfgen; Manuel Feißt; Michael Golatta; André Hennigs
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-07-19       Impact factor: 5.344

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.