COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

A five year experience of measuring clinical effectiveness in a breast reconstruction service using the BREAST-Q patient reported outcomes measure: A cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical effectiveness of breast reconstruction and the utility of the BREAST-Q patient-reported outcomes measure for routine patient care.

METHODS: The BREAST-Q was administered to all patients attending a breast reconstructive service (n = 343) at a University Hospital at each visit.

RESULTS: The BREAST-Q was easy to administer in a clinic setting, with a high participation rate (64.2% completing the minimum dataset of three BREAST-Qs). Pre-operatively, women with invasive cancer scored lower than those with DCIS or high-risk status (eg. mean psychosocial well-being scores 51.45 vs 63.74 vs 65.56, p < 0.05). At six months post-mound reconstruction the mean values for immediate and delayed timing of reconstruction were similar, with the change in quality of life from pre-reconstruction to this time-point post-reconstruction being greater in the delayed group (eg. mean improvement in psychosocial well-being scores for immediate 8.90 vs delayed 19.87, p < 0.05). Women with autologous flaps had greater improvements than women with implant-based reconstruction (eg. mean increase in psychosocial well-being scores 20.29 vs 9.58, p < 0.05). Breast reconstruction was highly effective in terms of improving psychosocial (mean pre-op 55.44 vs post-op 71.47, p < 0.001), physical (mean pre-op 69.82 vs post-op 74.78, p < 0.001), and sexual well-being (mean pre-op 38.74 vs post-op 54.17, p < 0.001), as well as satisfaction with breasts (mean pre-op 44.99 vs post-op 64.92, p < 0.001), in this non-selected cohort of patients.

CONCLUSION: Breast reconstruction is highly effective in improving the well-being of women undergoing mastectomy. The BREAST-Q is well suited for clinical effectiveness research and easily incorporated into routine patient care.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app