Reliability and validity testing of the patient and observer scar assessment scale in evaluating linear scars after breast cancer surgery

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Volumn 119, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 487-494

  Truong, Pauline T ^a   Lee, Junella C ^b   Soer, Benjamin ^b   Gaul, Catherine A ^b   Olivotto, Ivo A ^b  

^a BRITISH COLUMBIA CANCER AGENCY   (Canada)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST SURGERY; CANCER SURGERY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL OBSERVATION; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RATING SCALE; RELIABILITY; SCAR; SELF EVALUATION; VALIDATION STUDY; VANCOUVER SCAR SCALE;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CICATRIX; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASTECTOMY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 33846443631     PISSN: 00321052     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.prs.0000252949.77525.bc     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Hoeller, U., Kuhlmey, A., Bajrovic, A., et al. Cosmesis from the patient's and the doctor's view. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 57: 345, 2003.
2. Taylor, M. E., Perez, C. A., Halverson, K. J., et al. Factors influencing cosmetic results after conservation therapy for breast cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 31: 753, 1995.
3. Patterson, M. P., Pezner, R. D., Hill, L. R., et al. Patient self-evaluation of cosmetic outcome of breast-preserving cancer treatment. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 11: 1849, 1985.
4. Shrotria, S. The peri-areolar incision: Gateway to the breast! Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 27: 601, 2001.
5. Peyser, P. M., Abel, J. A., Straker, V. F., et al. Ultra-conservative skin-sparing "keyhole" mastectomy and immediate breast and areola reconstruction. Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl. 82: 227, 2000.
6. Alster, T. S., and West, T. B. Treatment of scars: A review. Ann. Plast. Surg. 39: 418, 1997.
7. O'Kane, S. Wound remodeling and scarring. J. Wound Care 11: 296, 2002.
8. Mustoe, T. A., Cooter, R. D., Gold, M. H., et al. International clinical recommendations on scar management. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 110: 560, 2002.
9. Truong, P. T., Abnousi, F., Yong, C. M., et al. Standardized assessment of breast cancer surgical scars integrating the Vancouver Scar Scale, Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, and patients' perspective. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 116: 1291, 2005.
10. Draaijers, J. L., Tempelman, F. R. H., Botman, Y. A. M., et al. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale: A reliable and feasible tool for scar evaluation. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 113: 1960, 2004.
11. Sullivan, T., Smith, J., Kermode, J., et al. Rating the burn scar. J. Burn Care Rehabil. 11: 256, 1990.
12. Baryza, M. J., and Baryza, G. A. The Vancouver Scar Scale: An administration tool and its interrater reliability. J. Burn Care Rehabil. 16: 535, 1995.
13. Nedelec, B., Shankowsky, H. A., and Tredget, E. E. Rating the resolving hypertrophic scar: Comparison of the Vancouver Scar Scale and scar volume. J. Burn Care Rehabil. 21: 205, 2000.
14. Bland, J. M., and Altman, D. G. Statistics notes: Cronbach's alpha. B.M.J. 314: 572, 1997.
15. Carmines, E. G., and Zeller, R. A. Reliability and Validity Assessment. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1994. Pp. 20-27.
16. McGraw, K. O., and Wong, S. P. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol. Methods 1: 30, 1996.
17. Landis, J. R., and Koch, G. G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33: 159, 1977.
18. Powers, P. S., Sarkar, S., Goldgof, D. B., et al. Scar assessment: Current problems and future solutions. J. Burn Care Rehabil. 20: 54, 1999.
19. Beausang, E., Floyd, H., Dunn, K. W., et al. A new quantitative scale for clinical scar assessment. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 102: 1954, 1998.
20. Davey, R. B., Sprod, R. T., and Neild, T. O. Computerized colour: A technique for the assessment of burn scar hypertrophy - A preliminary report. Burns 25: 207, 1999.