» Articles » PMID: 30254830

BREAST-Q Measurement of the Patient Perspective in Oncoplastic Breast Surgery: A Systematic Review

Overview
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2018 Sep 27
PMID 30254830
Citations 34
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Since BREAST-Q was developed in 2009, it has been widely used by clinicians and researchers to capture information regarding health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and patient satisfaction related to breast surgery. Yet clinical guidelines regarding the use of BREAST-Q for assessment of success of surgery in women with breast cancer remain limited. To maximize the benefits of using BREAST-Q to inform clinical decision making, this systematic review aimed to identify and appraise current evidence on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessed by BREAST-Q associated with breast oncoplastic surgery.

Methods: A detailed search strategy was implemented and electronic databases searched include PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Review was limited to peer-reviewed studies published in English from 2009 to January 2018. Any interventional and observational studies that used BREAST-Q to assess PROs in the assessment of breast oncoplastic surgery were included.

Results: Fifty-four peer-reviewed articles met inclusion criteria. Fifty-three studies were observational, 1 study was interventional. Current comparative studies using BREAST-Q indicated that abdominal flap, buttock flap, or thigh flap reconstruction offered highest satisfaction with breast; contralateral prophylactic mastectomy with immediate reconstruction offered higher levels of satisfaction with breast, but poor postsurgical physical well-being. Silicone implant and no radiation therapy offered higher level satisfaction and HRQoL.

Conclusions: Current evidence showed that BREAST-Q can effectively measure patient's satisfaction and HRQoL in relation to different type of breast oncoplastic surgeries. BREAST-Q captured meaningful and reliable information from the patients' perspective and may be useful for clinical decision making.

Citing Articles

Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Harvesting of DIEP and Latissimus Dorsi Flaps for Breast Reconstruction in Post-Mastectomy Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Yusufov S, Startseva O, Khalfaoui S, Zhigailova E, Gabriyanchik M, Manasherova D J Clin Med. 2025; 14(3).

PMID: 39941420 PMC: 11818507. DOI: 10.3390/jcm14030744.


Fat Grafting Versus Implants: Who's Happier? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

AlGhanim K, Minkhorst K, Jaszkul K, Keelan S, Appleton S, DeLyzer T Plast Surg (Oakv). 2025; 33(1):23-34.

PMID: 39876856 PMC: 11770728. DOI: 10.1177/22925503231190930.


Protocol for a multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomised controlled trial to compare PROs and safety outcomes between preoperative and postmastectomy radiotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer patients with immediate reconstruction via a....

Hao S, Hou J, Zhang L, Zhou C, Hou Y, Yu K BMJ Open. 2025; 15(1):e086980.

PMID: 39832996 PMC: 11748776. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-086980.


Demographic and clinical impact on preoperative BREAST-Q ePROM completion and baseline outcomes in women undergoing breast cancer surgery: a quantitative descriptive study at a Danish university hospital.

Prusse J, Piil K, Bak Hansen L, Orsted L, Schmidt V, Mejldal A BMJ Open. 2025; 15(1):e091122.

PMID: 39753265 PMC: 11749887. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-091122.


Comparison of Postoperative Breast Asymmetry Using Vectra 3D Imaging in Prepectoral Versus Subpectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction.

Choi S, Lee S, Chung K, Kim I, Lee J J Clin Med. 2024; 13(23).

PMID: 39685943 PMC: 11642326. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13237486.


References
1.
Hu E, Pusic A, Waljee J, Kuhn L, Hawley S, Wilkins E . Patient-reported aesthetic satisfaction with breast reconstruction during the long-term survivorship Period. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009; 124(1):1-8. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181ab10b2. View

2.
Cohen W, Mundy L, Ballard T, Klassen A, Cano S, Browne J . The BREAST-Q in surgical research: A review of the literature 2009-2015. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2016; 69(2):149-62. PMC: 4995882. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2015.11.013. View

3.
Sugrue R, MacGregor G, Sugrue M, Curran S, Murphy L . An evaluation of patient reported outcomes following breast reconstruction utilizing Breast Q. Breast. 2013; 22(2):158-161. DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2012.12.001. View

4.
Albornoz C, Matros E, Lee C, Hudis C, Pusic A, Elkin E . Bilateral Mastectomy versus Breast-Conserving Surgery for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: The Role of Breast Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015; 135(6):1518-1526. PMC: 4744797. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000001276. View

5.
Ong W, Schouwenburg M, van Bommel A, Stowell C, Allison K, Benn K . A Standard Set of Value-Based Patient-Centered Outcomes for Breast Cancer: The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) Initiative. JAMA Oncol. 2016; 3(5):677-685. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.4851. View