| 1. |
- Aristokleous, Iliana, et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of standardised surgical assessment and shared decision-making on morbidity and patient satisfaction after breast conserving therapy : A cross-sectional study
- 2023
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Surgical Oncology. - : Elsevier. - 0748-7983 .- 1532-2157. ; 49:1, s. 60-67
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The role of oncoplastic breast conserving therapy (OPBCT) on physical function, morbidity and patient satisfaction has yet to be defined. Additionally, technique selection should be individualised and incorporate patient preference. The study aim was to investigate differences between "standard" (sBCT) and oncoplastic breast conservation (OPBCT) in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) when patients have been assessed in a standardised manner and technique selection has been reached through shared decision-making (SDM).Methods: This is a cross-sectional study of 215 women treated at a tertiary referral centre. Standardised surgical assessment included breast and lesion volumetry, definition of resection ratio, patient-related risk factors and patient preference. Postoperative morbidity and patient satisfaction were assessed by validated PROs tools (Diseases of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand-DASH and Breast-Q). Patient experience was assessed by semi-structured interviews.Results: There was no difference of the median values between OPBCT and sBCT in postoperative morbidity of the upper extremity (DASH 3.3 vs 5, p = 0.656) or the function of the chest wall (Breast-Q 82 vs 82, p = 0.758). Postoperative satisfaction with breasts did not differ either (Breast-Q 65 vs 61, p = 0.702). On the individual level, women that opted for OPBCT after SDM had improved satisfaction when compared to baseline (+3 vs -1, p = 0.001). Shared decision-making changed patient attitude in 69.8% of patients, leading most often to de-escalation from mastectomy.Conclusions: These findings support that a combination of standardised surgical assessment and SDM allows for tailored treatment and de-escalation of oncoplastic surgery without negatively affecting patient satisfaction and morbidity.
|
|
| 2. |
- Pantiora, Eirini, et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of mode of delivery of patient reported outcomes in patients with breast disease : a randomised controlled trial
- 2024
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Surgery. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 1743-9191 .- 1743-9159. ; 110:1, s. 176-182
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Patient reported outcomes (PROs) have an integral role on how to improve patients' overall experience. The optimal PROs delivery in patients with breast disease is an important issue since PROs are steadily integrated in routine care.Methods: An institutional phase 3 randomised controlled, open-label trial. Eligible candidates were adult women with perceived or confirmed breast disease. Computer generated randomization was used to allocate interventions: collection of PROs in electronic or paper form. Our objective was the effectiveness of electronic versus paper form of PROs. The main outcome measures were: response rate, reported experience, administrative resources, and carbon dioxide emissions.Results: Two hundred thirty-eight patients were randomised. After loss-to-follow-up and consent withdrawals, 218 participants (median age, IQR=55, 21; n=110/n=108) were included in the per-intention-to-treat analysis. Response rate was 61.8% for electronic patient reported outcomes (ePROs) and 63.9% for paper patient reported outcomes (pPROs) (difference=-2.1%, 95% CI: -15.8-11.7%). Only known breast cancer at recruitment was predictive for response in multivariable analysis. ePROs were associated with a 57% reduction in administrative time required, a 95% reduction in incremental costs, and 84% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, all differences being significant. No difference was detected in perception of PRO significance or ease of completion, but participants experienced that they needed less time to complete ePROs [median, (IQR) 10 (9) respectively 15(10)]. Finally, respondents would prefer ePROs over pPROs (difference 48.1%, 95% CI: 32.8-63.4%).Conclusion: ePROs do not increase the response rate in patients with perceived or confirmed breast disease. However, they can enhance patient experience, reduce incremental costs, facilitate administrative logistics, and are more sustainable. On the basis of these findings, both modalities should continue to be available.
|
|
