Patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life following breast reconstruction: Patient-reported outcomes among saline and silicone implant recipients

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Volumn 125, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 761-771

  MacAdam, Sheina A ^a   Ho, Adelyn L ^b   Cook Jr , E F ^b   Lennox, Peter A ^b   Pusic, Andrea L ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SILICONE GEL; SODIUM CHLORIDE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST AUGMENTATION; BREAST ENDOPROSTHESIS; BREAST TUMOR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PROSTHESIS; QUALITY OF LIFE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; BREAST IMPLANTATION; BREAST IMPLANTS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; QUALITY OF LIFE; SILICONE GELS; SODIUM CHLORIDE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 77749328361     PISSN: 00321052     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181cb5cf8     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Canadian Cancer Society. Available at: www.cancer.ca. Accessed July 15, 2007.
2. Nattinger AB. Variation in the choice of breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy: Patient or physician decision-making? J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:5429-5431.
3. Morrow M, Scott SK, Mench HR, et al. Factors influencing the use of breast reconstruction postmastectomy: A National Cancer Database Study. J Am Coll Surg. 2001;192:1-8.
4. Desch CE, Penberthy LT, Hillner BE, et al. A sociodemographic and economic comparison of breast reconstruction, mastectomy and conservative surgery. Surgery 1999;125:441-447.
5. Polednak AP. How frequent is postmastectomy breast reconstructive surgery? A study linking two statewide databases. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;108:73-77.
6. Alderman AK, McMahon L Jr, Wilkins EG. The national utilization of immediate and early delayed breast reconstruction and the effect of sociodemographic factors. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;111:695-703.
7. Christian CK, Niland J, Edge SB, et al. A multi-institutional analysis of the socioeconomic determinants of breast reconstruction: A study of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Ann Surg. 2006;243:241-249.
8. Le GM, O'Malley CD, Glaser SL, et al. Breast implants following mastectomy in women with early-stage breast cancer: Prevalence and impact on survival. Breast Cancer Res. 2005; 7:R184-R193.
9. Brown MH, Shenker R, Silver SA. Cohesive silicone gel breast implants in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2005;116:768-779; discussion 780-781.
10. Brown SL, Pennello G, Berg WA, et al. Silicone gel breast implant rupture, extracapsular silicone, and health status in a population of women. J Rheumatol. 2001;28:996-1003.
11. Cunningham BL, Lokeh A, Gutowski KA. Saline-filled breast implant safety and efficacy: A multicenter retrospective review. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;105:2143-2149; discussion 2150-2151.
12. Handel N, Cordray T, Gutierrez J, et al. A long-term study of outcomes, complications, and patient satisfaction with breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;117:757-767; discussion 768-772.
13. Spear SL, Parikh PM, Goldstein JA. History of breast implants and the food and drug administration. Clin Plast Surg. 2009; 36:15-21.
14. Dean C, Chetty U, Forrest APM. Effects of immediate breast reconstruction on psychosocial morbidity after mastectomy. Lancet 1983;1:459-462.
15. Noone RB, Frazier TG, Hayward CZ, et al. Patient acceptance of immediate reconstruction following mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1989;69:632-638.
16. Stevens LA, McGrath MH, Druss RG, et al. The psychological impact of immediate breast reconstruction for women with early breast cancer. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1984;73:619-626.
17. Schain WS, Wellisch DK, Pasnau RO, et al. The sooner the better: A study of psychological factors in women undergoing immediate vs. delayed breast reconstruction. Am J Psychiatry 1985;142:40-46.
18. Shover LR, Randall JY, Tuason LJ, et al. Partial mastectomy and breast reconstruction: A comparison of their effects on psychosocial adjustment, body image and sexuality. Cancer 1995;75:54-64.
19. Derogatis LR. Psychosocial Adjustment to Illness Scale: Administration, Scoring and Procedures Manual. Baltimore, Md.: Clinical Psychometric Research; 1983.
20. Franzoi SL, Shields SA. The body esteem scale: Multidimensional structure and sex differences in a college population. J Pers Assess. 1984;48:173-178.
21. Rowland JH, Desmond BE, Meyerowitz TR, et al. Role of breast reconstructive surgery in physical and emotional outcomes among breast cancer survivors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000; 92:1422-1429.
22. Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel RM. The RAND 36-Item health survey 1.0. Health Econ. 1993;2:217-227.
23. Sherbourne CD, Stewart AL. The MOS social support survey. Soc Sci Med. 1991;32:705-714.
24. Radloff LS. The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas. 1977;1:385-401.
25. Busby DM, Crane DR, Larson JH, et al. A revision of the dyadic adjustment scale for use with distressed and nondistressed couples: Construct hierarchy and multidimensional scales. J Marital Fam Ther. 1995;21:289-308.
26. Watts RJ. Sexual functioning, health beliefs, and compliance with high blood pressure medications. Nurs Res. 1982;31: 278-283.
27. Schag CC, Heinrich RL, Ganz PA. Cancer inventory of problem situations: An instrument for assessing cancer patients' rehabilitation needs. J Psychosoc Oncol. 1983;1:11-24.
28. Wilkins EG, Cederna PS, Lowery JC, et al. Prospective analysis of psychosocial outcomes in breast reconstruction: One-year postoperative results from the Michigan breast reconstruction outcome study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;106:1014-1025.
29. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). Med Care 1992;30:473.
30. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Bonomi A, et al. The functional assessment of cancer therapy (FACT) scales: Incorporating disease specificity and subjectivity into quality of life (QL) assessment. Proc Ann Meet Soc Clin Oncol. 1990;9:A1190.
31. Pusic AL, Chen CM, Cano S, et al. Measuring quality of life in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery: A systematic review of patient-reported outcomes instruments. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;120:823-837.
32. Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM, et al. Development of a new patient reported outcome measure for breast surgery: The BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:345-353.
33. Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. Assessing health status and quality of life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res. 2002;11:193-205.
34. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Patient reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. 2006. Availble at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/ Guidances/UCM 193282.pdf. Accessed January 1, 2009.
35. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQC30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:365-376.
36. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bullinger M, et al. TheEORTCcore quality of life questionnaire: Interim results of an international field study. In Osoba D, ed. Effect of Cancer on Quality of Life. Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press Ltd.; 1991:185-203.
37. Osoba D, Aaronson NK, Zee B, Sprangers MAG, te Velde A. Modification of the EORTC QLQ-C30 based upon content validity and reliability testing in large samples of patients with cancer. Qual Life Res. 1997;6:103-108.
38. Sprangers MAG, Groenvold M, Arraras JI, et al. The EORTC breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire module: First results from a three-country field study. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:2756-2768.
39. Bjordal K, de Graeff A, Fayers PM, et al. A 12 country field study of the EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3.0) and the head and neck cancer specific module (EORTC QLQ-H&N35) in head and neck patients. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:1796-1807.
40. Sprangers MAG, Groenvold M, Arraras JI, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Breast Cancer Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire Module: First results from a three country field study. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:2756-2768.
41. The Breast-Q. Available at: http://www.mskcc.org/mskcc/ shared/Breast-Q/scoreBQ.html.
42. Rasch analysis. Available at: http://www.rasch-analysis.com.
43. EORTC QLQC30 Scoring Manual. Brussels, Belgium: QL Coordinator Quality of Life Unit, EORTC Data Center.
44. Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care 2003;41: 582-592.
45. Renneker R, Cutler M. Psychological problems of adjustment of cancer of the breast. JAMA. 1952;148:833-838.
46. Jamison KR, Wellisch DK, Pasnau RO. Psychological aspects of mastectomy: The woman's perspective. Am J Psychiatry 1978;135:432-436.
47. Asken MJ. Psychoemotional aspects of mastectomy: A review of recent literature. Am J Psychiatry 1975;132:56.
48. Roberts MM, Furnival IG, Forrest APM. The morbidity of mastectomy. Br J Surg. 1972;59:301-302.
49. Polivy J. Psychological effects of mastectomy on a woman's feminine self-concept. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1977;164:77-87.
50. Frost MH, Schaid DJ, Sellers TA, et al. Long-term satisfaction and psychological and social function following bilateral prophylactic mastectomy. JAMA. 2000;284:319-324.
51. Kostbade-Hughes K. Psychosocial and functional status of breast cancer patients: The influence of diagnosis and treatment choice. Cancer Nurs. 1993;16:222-226.
52. Maguire P. The psychological and social sequelae of mastectomy. In Howells JG, ed. Modern Perspectives in the Psychiatric Aspects of Surgery. New York: Brunner/Mazel; 1976:390-421.
53. Frierson GM, Andersen BL. Breast reconstruction. In Sarwer DB, ed. Psychological Aspects of Reconstructive and Cosmetic Plastic Surgery: Clinical, Empirical and Ethical Perspectives. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006:173-188.
54. Franchelli S, Leone MS, Berrino P, et al. Psychological evaluation of patients undergoing breast reconstruction using two different methods: Autologous tissues versus prostheses. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1995;95:1213-1218; discussion 1219-1220.
55. Wellisch DK, Schain WS, Noone R, et al. Psychosocial correlates of immediate versus delayed reconstruction of the breast. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1985;76:713-718.
56. Elder EE, Brandberg Y, Bjorklund T, et al. Quality of life and patient satisfaction in breast cancer patients after immediate breast reconstruction: A prospective study. Breast 2005;14: 201-208.
57. Cederna PS, Yates WR, Chang P, et al. Postmastectomy reconstruction: Comparative analysis of the psychosocial, functional, and cosmetic effects of transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap versus breast implant reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 1995;35:458-468.
58. Edsander-Nord A, Brandberg Y, Wickman M. Quality of life, patients' satisfaction and aesthetic outcome after pedicled or free TRAM flap breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;107: 1142-1153; discussion 1154-1155.
59. Brandberg Y, Malm J, Blonqvist L. A prospective and randomized study, "SVEA," comparing effects of three methods of delayed breast reconstruction on quality of life, patientdefined problem areas of life and cosmetic result. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;105:66-74; discussion 75-76.
60. Saulis AS, Mustoe TA, Fine NA. A retrospective analysis of patient satisfaction with immediate postmastectomy breast reconstruction: Comparison of three common procedures. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;119:1669-1676; discussion 1677-1678.
61. Velanovich V. Experience with a generic quality of life instrument in a general surgical practice. Int J Surg Invest. 2000;1:447-452.