Mirjana Marinkovic1,2, Nebojsa Djordjevic3,4, Lidija Djordjevic4, Nebojsa Ignjatovic3, Miodrag Djordjevic4, Vesna Karanikolic3. 1. Faculty of Medicine, University of Niš, Brace Ignjatovica 29, Niš, 18000, Serbia. marinkovicmirjana00@gmail.com. 2. Clinic for Endocrine Surgery and Breast Surgery Clinical Center Niš, Niš, Serbia. marinkovicmirjana00@gmail.com. 3. Faculty of Medicine, University of Niš, Brace Ignjatovica 29, Niš, 18000, Serbia. 4. Clinic for Endocrine Surgery and Breast Surgery Clinical Center Niš, Niš, Serbia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of the study is to describe QoL in women who have undergone surgical treatment for breast cancer (BC). The focus of the description is the differences in QoL between women treated by modified radical mastectomy (MRM) and women who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) at the Breast and Endocrine Surgery Department of the Clinical Center of Niš, Serbia. METHOD: From January 1, 2014, until December 31, 2017, 300 patients were treated with BCS and 300 patients with MRM. To assess the QOL, a total of 600 BC patients completed the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaires. The results were analyzed using the t test and chi-square test. WHOQOL produces a quality of life profile. It derives four domain scores: physical health, psychological, social relationships, and environment. Social and demographic factors (age, education, marital status) were collected in both groups. RESULT: In all four domains, patients treated with conserving surgeries scored higher than patients treated with radical mastectomy. This result was controlled for a set of demographic variables. The differences in QoL scores are present on all levels of controlling variables. CONCLUSION: According to the results of this study, the QoL in women after an MRM is significantly lower than the QoL in women after BCS. It is especially true for the environment domain. Conserving surgery should be recommended and specific, and patient-centered interventions for increasing QoL of the patients who opted for radical mastectomy should be designed. The intervention should focus on social and environmental domains.
PURPOSE: The objective of the study is to describe QoL in women who have undergone surgical treatment for breast cancer (BC). The focus of the description is the differences in QoL between women treated by modified radical mastectomy (MRM) and women who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) at the Breast and Endocrine Surgery Department of the Clinical Center of Niš, Serbia. METHOD: From January 1, 2014, until December 31, 2017, 300 patients were treated with BCS and 300 patients with MRM. To assess the QOL, a total of 600 BC patients completed the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaires. The results were analyzed using the t test and chi-square test. WHOQOL produces a quality of life profile. It derives four domain scores: physical health, psychological, social relationships, and environment. Social and demographic factors (age, education, marital status) were collected in both groups. RESULT: In all four domains, patients treated with conserving surgeries scored higher than patients treated with radical mastectomy. This result was controlled for a set of demographic variables. The differences in QoL scores are present on all levels of controlling variables. CONCLUSION: According to the results of this study, the QoL in women after an MRM is significantly lower than the QoL in women after BCS. It is especially true for the environment domain. Conserving surgery should be recommended and specific, and patient-centered interventions for increasing QoL of the patients who opted for radical mastectomy should be designed. The intervention should focus on social and environmental domains.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Breast-conserving surgery; Mastectomy; QOL
Authors: L J M Caldon; K A Collins; D J Wilde; S H Ahmedzai; T W Noble; A Stotter; D M Sibbering; S Holt; M W R Reed Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2011-05-10 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Magdalena Tarkowska; Iwona Głowacka-Mrotek; Tomasz Nowikiewicz; Aleksander Goch; Wojciech Zegarski Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-03-24 Impact factor: 4.241