Dataset Information

Exploring the Role of Partner Satisfaction in Predicting Patient Satisfaction Regarding Post-mastectomy Breast Reconstruction

ABSTRACT: Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text. Background: Qualitative studies have suggested that perceived partner satisfaction is an important predictor of patient satisfaction in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction. To better characterize these relationships, a couple-based study employing a quantitative analysis was conducted. Methods: BREAST-Q and a novel partner survey were used to assess relationships among patient satisfaction, perceived partner satisfaction, and reported partner satisfaction in 11 couples. Breast reconstruction patients completed the postoperative BREAST-Q, and their partners completed a survey designed to assess satisfaction with their emotional relationship, partner’s breasts, partner’s medical care, and sexual relationship. Results: The majority of patients were married. Seventy-three percent of women had an implant-based reconstruction, while 27% had an abdominal-based reconstruction. The majority (82%) of patients reported no complications with reconstructive procedures. The mean patient BREAST-Q score was 86 (range, 48–97), and the mean partner score was 87 (64–98). There was a correlation of 0.85 between reported partner satisfaction and patient satisfaction. Fifty-eight percent of partners reported being afraid to touch their partner’s reconstructed breasts out of fear of causing pain; 7% of patients reported experiencing pain in the area of their reconstructed breasts. Conclusions: This study reveals that partner satisfaction with breast reconstruction correlates with patient satisfaction. With this knowledge, we will be able to formulate suggestions on how preoperative consultations could be conducted as to optimize patient and partner satisfaction and bridge the gap between patient and partner knowledge of postoperative pain.

SUBMITTER: Cimaroli S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7413778 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeThe goal of this study was to explore the perspectives and practice of radiation oncologists who treat breast cancer patients who have had breast reconstruction.MethodsIn 2010, an original electronic survey was sent to all physician members of the American Society of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Research Institute-Breast Cancer Studies Group in the United Kingdom, Thai Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Swiss Society of Radiation Oncology, and Turkish Radiation Oncology Society. We identified factors associated with radiation oncologists who treat breast cancer patients with reconstruction performed prior to radiation and obtained information regarding radiation management of the breast reconstruction.Results358 radiation oncologists responded, and 60% of the physicians were from the United States. While 64% of participants agree or strongly agree that breast image affects a woman's quality of life during radiation, 57% feel that reconstruction challenges their ability to deliver effective breast radiation. Compared with other countries, treatment within the United States was associated with a high reconstruction rate (>/= 50% of mastectomy patients) prior to radiation (p < 0.05). Delayed-immediate reconstruction with a temporary tissue expander was more common in the United States than in other countries (52% vs. 23%, p = 0.01). Among physicians who treat patients with tissue expanders, the majority (60%) prefer a moderately inflated implant with 150-250 cc of fluid rather than a completely deflated (13%) or inflated expander (28%) during radiation. Among radiation oncologists who treat reconstructions, 49% never use bolus and 40% never boost a breast reconstruction. United States physicians were more likely than physicians from other countries to boost or bolus the reconstruction irrespective of the type of reconstruction seen in their clinic patients (p < 0.01).ConclusionsGreat variation in practice is evident from our study of radiation treatment for breast cancer patients with reconstruction. Further research on the impact and delivery of radiation to a reconstructed breast may validate some of the observed practices, highlight the variability in treatment practice, and help create a treatment consensus.

Project description:BackgroundThe management of early breast cancer (BC) with skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is not based on level-1 evidence. In this study, the oncological outcome, post-operative morbidity and patients' satisfaction with SSM and IBR using the latissimus dorsi (LD) myocutaneous flap and/or breast prosthesis is evaluated.Methods137 SSMs with IBR (10 bilateral) were undertaken in 127 consecutive women, using the LD flap plus implant (n = 85), LD flap alone (n = 1) or implant alone (n = 51), for early BC (n = 130) or prophylaxis (n = 7). Nipple reconstruction was performed in 69 patients, using the trefoil local flap technique (n = 61), nipple sharing (n = 6), skin graft (n = 1) and Monocryl mesh (n = 1). Thirty patients underwent contra-lateral procedures to enhance symmetry, including 19 augmentations and 11 mastopexy/reduction mammoplasties. A linear visual analogue scale was used to assess patient satisfaction with surgical outcome, ranging from 0 (not satisfied) to 10 (most satisfied).ResultsAfter a median follow-up of 36 months (range = 6-101 months) there were no local recurrences. Overall breast cancer specific survival was 99.2%, 8 patients developed distant disease and 1 died of metastatic BC. There were no cases of partial or total LD flap loss. Morbidities included infection, requiring implant removal in 2 patients and 1 patient developed marginal ischaemia of the skin envelope. Chemotherapy was delayed in 1 patient due to infection. Significant capsule formation, requiring capsulotomy, was observed in 85% of patients who had either post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMR) or prior radiotherapy (RT) compared with 13% for those who had not received RT. The outcome questionnaire was completed by 82 (64.6%) of 127 patients with a median satisfaction score of 9 (range = 5-10).ConclusionSSM with IBR is associated with low morbidity, high levels of patient satisfaction and is oncologically safe for T(is), T1 and T2 tumours without extensive skin involvement.

Project description:ImportanceBreast reconstruction has the potential to improve a person's body image and quality of life but has important risks. Variations in who undergoes breast reconstruction have led to questions about the quality of patient decisions.ObjectiveTo assess the quality of patient decisions about breast reconstruction.Design, setting, and participantsA prospective, cross-sectional survey study was conducted from June 27, 2012, to February 28, 2014, at a single, academic, multidisciplinary oncology clinic among women planning to undergo mastectomy for stage I to III invasive ductal or lobular breast cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ, or prophylaxis.ExposuresMastectomy only and mastectomy with reconstruction.Main outcome and measuresKnowledge, as ascertained using the Decision Quality Instrument; preference concordance, based on rating and ranking of key attributes; and decision quality, defined as having knowledge of 50% or more and preference concordance.ResultsDuring the 20-month period, 214 patients were eligible, 182 were approached, and 32 missed. We enrolled 145 patients (79.7% enrollment rate), and received surveys from 131 patients (72.0% participation rate). Five participants became ineligible. The final study population was 126 patients. Among the 126 women in the study (mean [SD] age, 53.2 [12.1] years), the mean (SD) knowledge score was 58.5% (16.2%) and did not differ by treatment group (mastectomy only, 55.2% [15.0%]; mastectomy with reconstruction, 60.5% [16.5%]). A total of 82 of 123 participants (66.7%) had a calculated treatment preference of mastectomy only; 39 of these women (47.6%) underwent mastectomy only. A total of 41 participants (32.5%) had a calculated treatment preference of mastectomy with reconstruction; 36 of these women (87.8%) underwent mastectomy with reconstruction. Overall, 52 of 120 participants (43.3%) made a high-quality decision. In multivariable analysis, white race/ethnicity (odds ratio [OR], 2.72; 95% CI, 1.00-7.38; P = .05), having private insurance (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.35-1.93; P < .001), having a high school education or less (vs some college) (OR, 4.84; 95% CI, 1.22-19.21; P = .02), having a college degree (vs some college) (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.53-2.49; P < .001), and not having a malignant neoplasm (eg, BRCA carriers) (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.25-7.85; P = .01) were independently associated with making a high-quality decision.Conclusions and relevanceA minority of patients undergoing mastectomy in a single academic center made a high-quality decision about reconstruction. Shared decision making is needed to support decisions about breast reconstruction.

Project description:Purpose The goals of immediate postmastectomy breast reconstruction are to minimize deformity and optimize quality of life as perceived by patients. We prospectively evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in women undergoing immediate implant-based or autologous reconstruction. Methods Women undergoing immediate postmastectomy reconstruction for invasive cancer and/or carcinoma in situ were enrolled at 11 sites. Women underwent implant-based or autologous tissue reconstruction. Patients completed the BREAST-Q, a condition-specific PRO measure for breast surgery patients, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29, a generic PRO measure, before and 1 year after surgery. Mean changes in PRO scores were summarized. Mixed-effects regression models were used to compare PRO scores across procedure types. Results In total, 1,632 patients (n = 1,139 implant, n = 493 autologous) were included; 1,183 (72.5%) responded to 1-year questionnaires. After analysis was controlled for baseline values, patients who underwent autologous reconstruction had greater satisfaction with their breasts than those who underwent implant-based reconstruction (difference, 6.3; P < .001), greater sexual well-being (difference, 4.5; P = .003), and greater psychosocial well-being (difference, 3.7; P = .02) at 1 year. Patients in the autologous reconstruction group had improved satisfaction with breasts (difference, 8.0; P = .002) and psychosocial well-being (difference, 4.6; P = .047) compared with preoperative baseline. Physical well-being of the chest was not fully restored in either the implant group (difference, -3.8; P = .001) or autologous group (-2.2; P = .04), nor was physical well-being of the abdomen in patients who underwent autologous reconstruction (-13.4; P < .001). Anxiety and depression were mitigated at 1 year in both groups. Compared with their baseline reports, patients who underwent implant reconstruction had decreased fatigue (difference, -1.4; P = .035), whereas patients who underwent autologous reconstruction had increased pain interference (difference, 2.0; P = .006). Conclusion At 1 year after mastectomy, patients who underwent autologous reconstruction were more satisfied with their breasts and had greater psychosocial and sexual well-being than those who underwent implant reconstruction. Although satisfaction with breasts was equal to or greater than baseline levels, physical well-being was not fully restored. This information can help patients better understand expected outcomes and may guide innovations to improve outcomes.

Project description:Although breast conservation is therapeutically equivalent to mastectomy for most patients with early-stage breast cancer, an increasing number of patients are pursuing mastectomy, which may be followed by breast reconstruction. We sought to evaluate long-term quality of life and cosmetic outcomes after different locoregional management approaches, as perceived by patients themselves.We surveyed women with a diagnosis of nonmetastatic breast cancer from 2005 to 2007, as reported to the Los Angeles and Detroit population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. We received responses from 2290 women approximately 9 months after diagnosis (73% response rate) and from 1536 of these 4 years later. We evaluated quality of life and patterns and correlates of satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes overall and, more specifically, within the subgroup undergoing mastectomy with reconstruction, using multivariable linear regression.Of the 1450 patients who responded to both surveys and experienced no recurrence, 963 underwent breast-conserving surgery, 263 mastectomy without reconstruction, and 222 mastectomy with reconstruction. Cosmetic satisfaction was similar between those receiving breast conservation therapy and those receiving mastectomy with reconstruction. Among patients receiving mastectomy with reconstruction, reconstruction type and radiation receipt were associated with satisfaction (P < 0.001), with an adjusted scaled satisfaction score of 4.7 for patients receiving autologous reconstruction without radiation, 4.4 for patients receiving autologous reconstruction and radiation therapy, 4.1 for patients receiving implant reconstruction without radiation therapy, and 2.8 for patients receiving implant reconstruction and radiation therapy.Patient-reported cosmetic satisfaction was similar after breast conservation and after mastectomy with reconstruction. In patients undergoing postmastectomy radiation, the use of autologous reconstruction may mitigate the deleterious impact of radiation on cosmetic outcomes.

Dataset Information

Exploring the Role of Partner Satisfaction in Predicting Patient Satisfaction Regarding Post-mastectomy Breast Reconstruction

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets