Moving towards patient-reported outcomes in routine clinical practice: implementation lessons from the BREAST-Q

Interventions influencing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) response rates in cancer: a scoping review

PURPOSE

Despite the emerging evidence around patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) monitoring benefits in oncology, completion rates remain low due to numerous multi-level barriers. This review summarizes existing literature on interventions employed to improve PROMs response rates in routine practice among patients with cancer.

METHODS

PubMed database was used to perform a literature search of articles published between 2000 and 2022. Articles were included if they focused on PROMs implementation in non-clinical trial setting and reported results on methodologies and their influence on response rates.

RESULTS

A total of 495 abstracts were screened for eligibility, and 14 articles that met the inclusion criteria were included. PROMs mode of administration varied between electronic only (four studies, 28.6%), paper only (two studies, 14.3%), electronic-paper (six studies, 42.9%), and electronic-telephone (two studies, 14.3%). Reminder systems, using electronic, paper, or in-person, were implemented in 12 studies (85.7%). Different strategies of initial recruitment, aiming to enhance patients' PROM engagements, were outlined in five studies (35.7%).

CONCLUSION

Multiple interventions were implemented to improve PROMs completion rates. Mode of questionnaire administration, reminder systems, patient education on benefits of PROMs, and clinical staff involvement were shown to be effective in increasing the overall completion rate.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

This review provides a summary for researchers and clinicians on the current practice of PROMs implementation, thus creating a framework for the impact of different methodologies on patient's response rate for better monitoring of recurring symptoms, including long-term side effects, emotional distress, and changes in health-related quality of life.

Patient Reported Outcomes in Breast Cancer: A Plea for the Silent and Forgotten

BACKGROUND

There are an increasing number of reports addressing patient reported outcomes (PRO's) following breast conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy with reconstruction (MR), but few addressing mastectomy alone (MA). Patients' choice of procedure is often preference-based, making PRO's essential to inform decision making. The current research aims to evaluate PRO's associated with all three surgical procedures, along with patient participation rates.

METHODS

Patients with unilateral, nonrecurrent breast cancer were prospectively enrolled in the study (June 2020 to September 2023). Participants received the BREAST-Q (BQ) survey preoperatively (Q1), 2 to 6 weeks (Q2) and 1 year (Q3) postoperatively. Forced multiple regression analyses were performed to compare postoperative BQ scores.

RESULTS

199 patients were eligible, with 73.4% (146/199) participating in the study. While MA had lower satisfaction with breast scores than BCS (B = -11.6), they were equivalent to those of MR (B = -16.5), with similar pathologic and treatment related factors. Physical well being was similar between all three procedures, while psychosocial well being scores were lower following MR (B = -15.5), but not MA. Patient age, BMI, and tumor size variably impacted BQ scores, but preoperative BQ scores independently correlated with postoperative scores across all domains.

CONCLUSION

Patient response rates are consistent with the literature, but require improvement to ensure meaningful conclusions, generalizability of results, and comparisons between studies. Patients undergoing BCS reported the highest satisfaction and quality of life, with MA being noninferior to MR. Efforts to increase patient participation in PRO's are required, especially in those undergoing MA.

Reconstructing Failure: Assessing Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes after Loss of Initial Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Breast reconstruction failure, defined as the removal of a prosthetic device or flap without immediate replacement, can be traumatic. The authors describe the progression of tissue expander (TE), implant, or autologous breast reconstructive failure, and assess the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among patients who undergo additional reconstruction.

METHOD

Patients undergoing TE, implant, or autologous breast reconstruction between 2017 and 2022 were included, and patients with reconstructive failures were identified. Outcomes of interests included receipt of additional reconstruction and BREAST-Q scores 1 year after reconstructive failure. The authors also performed a propensity-matched analysis between patients who underwent secondary reconstruction and patients who had an uncomplicated reconstruction.

RESULTS

A total of 4258 patients receiving TEs, 4420 patients receiving implants, and 1545 patients receiving autologous breast reconstruction were included. Of patients who experienced reconstructive failures, 49.5% of patients with TEs, 4.8% of patients with implants, and 53.8% of patients with autologous reconstruction underwent secondary reconstruction. Age, psychiatric diagnosis, chemotherapy, radiation, and mastectomy type were associated with increased likelihood of secondary reconstruction. Between patients with and without additional reconstruction, higher Psychosocial Well-being trended toward the former cohort (61 [interquartile range, 56, 80] versus 50 [46, 65]; P = 0.085). Propensity-matched analysis demonstrated comparable PROs at 1 year after definite reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Fewer than half of patients with reconstructive failure undergo an additional reconstruction. Patients who receive secondary reconstruction may have greater Psychosocial Well-being scores than those who do not and comparable PROs to those who had uncomplicated initial reconstruction. Surgeons should counsel patients with reconstructive failures that secondary reconstruction, although traumatizing, may be beneficial.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, III.

Satisfaction with Breasts following Autologous Reconstruction: Assessing Associated Factors and the Impact of Revisions

BACKGROUND

Autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) may confer higher patient-reported outcomes than implant breast reconstruction, but an in-depth examination of factors associated with satisfaction after ABR is lacking. The authors aimed to determine independent predictors of 1-year satisfaction with breasts after ABR and assess the importance of elective procedures on satisfaction.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent abdominally based ABR between 2010 and 2021 and completed the BREAST-Q Satisfaction with Breasts module at 1 year was performed. Elective procedures consisted of breast revision and nipple-areola complex reconstruction.

RESULTS

A total of 959 patients were included. Satisfaction with Breasts score improved from 53 (interquartile range [IQR], 44 to 64) preoperatively to 64 (IQR, 53 to 78) at 1 year postoperatively ( P < 0.001). Factors significantly associated with decreased postoperative score included lower preoperative scores (β = 0.19 [95% CI, 0.08 to 0.31]; P = 0.001), older age (β = -0.17 [95% CI, -0.34 to -0.01]; P = 0.042), Asian race (versus White, β = -6.7 [95% CI, -12 to -1.7]; P = 0.008), and a history of psychiatric diagnoses (β = -3.4 [95% CI, -6.2 to -0.66]; P = 0.015). Patients who received radiation therapy (β = -5.6 [95% CI, -9.0 to -2.3]; P = 0.001) or had mastectomy skin flap/nipple necrosis (β = -3.8 [95% CI, -7.6 to -0.06]; P = 0.046) also had significantly decreased scores. Satisfaction with Breasts scores improved significantly after breast revision procedures (from 54 [IQR, 42 to 65] to 65 [IQR, 54 to 78]; P < 0.001), and nipple-areola complex reconstruction (from 58 [IQR, 47 to 71] to 67 [IQR, 57 to 82]; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple independent patient and treatment level factors are associated with lower 1-year Satisfaction with Breasts scores following ABR. Elective procedures have the potential to improve satisfaction. Understanding these findings is imperative for optimizing clinical decision-making and managing expectations.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, III.

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

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate patients' use of electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (ePROMs) and understand the demographic and clinical factors that may be correlated with patient responses to the BREAST-Q at the preoperative stage of breast cancer. The BREAST-Q is a PROM in questionnaire format, developed and validated to assess satisfaction and quality of life for breast surgery patients.The hypothesis tested is that considering disparities in geography, age and education among responders is essential for capturing a diverse patient population in future Patent-Reported Outcome Measures initiatives, examining how these characteristics are associated with Patent-Reported Outcome Measures utilisation and outcomes.

DESIGN

Quantitative descriptive study.

SETTING

Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures were collected between 6 September 2021 and 5 September 2022 from patients recruited from an outpatient clinic at a Plastic- and Breast Surgery Department at a University Hospital in Denmark.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants include a total of 629 Danish-speaking women diagnosed with breast cancer and scheduled for breast cancer surgery, with a final participation rate of 468.

INTERVENTION

Preoperative ePROMs and demographic data were collected between September 2020 and 2021 through patients' secure national digital post-box.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Demographic variables of both responders and non-responders were assessed using t-tests, Mann-Whitney U tests and χ2 tests. Linear regression models were employed to determine the demographic variables associated with BREAST-Q subscale scores.

RESULTS

The response rate for ePROMs was 72.5% with a median age of responders at 62 years. Older patients reported lower breast satisfaction (unadjusted coefficient bu=-0.26 (95% CI -0.44; -0.07), p=0.006) but better physical well-being (adjusted coefficient ba=0.23 (0.08; 0.37), p<0.001). Lower educational achievement was correlated with reduced breast satisfaction and psychosocial and sexual well-being; for example, patients with a master's/doctoral level education scored 14.29 points higher in psychosocial well-being (95% CI 6.50; 22.07, p<0.001) compared with those with lower secondary education. Cohabiting patients reported psychosocial well-being scores approximately four points higher than those living alone (ba=3.91 (0.06; 7.75), p=0.046). Body mass index (BMI) was negatively associated with sexual well-being, with a 0.75-point decline per additional BMI point (ba=-0.75, (-1.12; -0.37), p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrates a positive attitude towards completing BREAST-Q as ePROMs among women diagnosed with breast cancer in the investigated region in Denmark. However, completion rates for ePROMs varied by demographic factors such as age, marital status and access to healthcare. Younger, more educated, married patients with lower BMI who lived near major cities were more likely to report better pretreatment outcomes.

Moving beyond barriers: a mixed-method study to develop evidence-based strategies to improve implementation of PROMs in clinical oncology care

PURPOSE

This study aimed to identify feasible, evidence-based strategies to improve the use of Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) implemented in clinical oncology practice.

METHODS

A mixed-method study involving observations of consultations and semi-structured interviews with patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) was conducted to identify facilitators and barriers for using PROMs; barriers and facilitators were structured following the Theoretical Domains Framework. For each barrier, evidence-based improvement strategies were selected using the Behaviour Change Techniques Taxonomy v1. Subsequently, improvement strategies were ranked on priority and feasibility by an expert panel of HCPs, information technology professionals, and PROMs implementation specialists, creating an implementation improvement strategy.

RESULTS

Ten consultations were observed and 14 interviews conducted. Barriers for implementation included that the electronic health record and PROMs did not align to the individual needs of end users, the HCPs' hesitance to advice patients about health-related quality-of-life issues, and a lack of consensus on which HCPs were responsible for discussing PROMs with patients. Forty-one improvement strategies were identified, of which 25 remained after ranking. These included: redesigning the PROMs dashboard by including patient management advice, enhancing patient support to complete PROMs, and clarifying HCPs' responsibilities for discussing PROMs. Strategies currently considered less feasible were: improving user-friendliness of the patient portal due to technical constraints, aligning PROMs assessment frequency with clinical courses, and using baseline PROMs for early identification of vulnerabilities and supportive care needs. These will be studied in future research.

CONCLUSION

Evidence-based improvement strategies to ensure lasting adoption of PROMs in clinical practice were identified.

Race and Ethnicity Impacts Patient-Reported Outcomes in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Addressing social determinants of health is critical in achieving health equity, and of the many determinants, race and ethnicity are key contributors in postmastectomy breast reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of race and ethnicity on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) and to provide reference values for each cohort.

METHODS

We identified all patients who underwent IBBR between January 2017 and August 2022 and completed the BREAST-Q longitudinally. Race and ethnicity were self-categorized as White, Asian, Black, or Hispanic. Reference values were established. Outcomes of interest were BREAST-Q scores preoperatively, and 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) modeling was performed to assess race and ethnicity as independent predictors of BREAST-Q scores.

RESULTS

Overall, 3281 patients were included, of whom 2479 (75.6%) were White, 296 (9.0%) were Asian, 239 (7.3%) were Black, and 267 (8.1%) were Hispanic. There were significant differences in Physical Well-being of the Chest at all timepoints; Satisfaction with Breasts and Psychosocial Well-being at preoperative, 6 months, and 1 year; and in Sexual Well-being at 1 year. GEE modeling showed that relative to White patients, Asian subjects scored significantly lower on all BREAST-Q domains, while Black and Hispanic patients scored significantly lower on the Physical Well-being of the Chest domain.

CONCLUSION

Racial and ethnic disparities persist within IBBR, with minority patients scoring lower on the BREAST-Q than White patients. This study suggests that more work is needed to understand and improve these PROs in minority patient populations. Individualized reference values may prove beneficial in assessing outcomes over time.

Breast-Conserving Therapy Versus Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although studies have compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after breast conserving-therapy (BCT) and postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR), they often have been confounded by treatment or other factors that complicate a direct comparison. This study aimed to compare PROs after BCT and PMBR by using propensity score-matching analysis.

METHODS

Patients who underwent BCT or PMBR between 2010 and 2022 and completed the BREAST-Q were identified. Each BCT patient was matched to a PMBR patient using nearest-neighbor 1:1 matching with replacement for each BREAST-Q time point. Outcomes included all prospectively collected BREAST-Q domains preoperatively, at 6 months, and at 1, 2, and 3 years postoperatively. A 4-point difference was considered clinically meaningful.

RESULTS

For this study, 6215 patients (2501 BCT [40.2%] and 3714 PMBR [59.8%] patients) were eligible, and 2616 unique patients were matched. Preoperatively, 463 BCT and 463 PMBR patients were matched for analysis (6 months [443 matched pairs], 1 year [639 matched pairs], 2 years [421 matched pairs], 3 years [254 matched pairs]). At 6 months postoperatively, the BCT patients scored higher on all BREAST-Q domains than the PMBR patients (p < 0.05; differences > 4 points). At 1, 2, and 3 years, the patients who underwent BCT consistently had superior Satisfaction With Breasts, Psychosocial Well-Being, and Sexual Well-Being (p < 0.05), and the differences were clinically meaningful.

CONCLUSION

In this statistically powered study, the BCT patients reported higher quality of life than the PMBR patients in early assessment and also through 3 years of follow-up evaluation. Given the equivalency in survival and recurrence outcomes between BCT and PMBR, patients eligible for either surgery should be counseled regarding the superiority of BCT in terms of PROs.

The Importance of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Oncological Vulvoperineal Defect Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have gained increased importance in assessing outcomes after reconstructive surgery. This also applies to the reconstruction of vulvoperineal defects after resection of gynecological or colorectal cancers in women. The objective of this study is to analyze the current state of PROM tool use within this patient population.

METHODS

By systematic literature searches in Embase, Medline, and Web of Science, English-language studies published after 1980, including randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case series reporting on vulvoperineal defect reconstruction, which were included if they also analyzed quality of life (QoL) and/or PROMs. The PROM tools used by each study were extracted, analyzed, and compared.

RESULTS

The primary search yielded 2576 abstracts, of which 395 articles were retrieved in full text. Of these, 50 reported on vulvoperineal defect reconstruction, among which 27 studies analyzing QoL were found. Of those, 17 met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. After full-text screening, 14 different PROM tools and 5 individual, non-standardized questionnaires were identified. Only 22% of studies used a validated PROM tool.

CONCLUSION

Far too few studies currently use PROM tools to assess outcomes in oncological vulvoperineal defect reconstruction. Less than half of the used PROMs are validated. No PROM was designed to specifically measure QoL in this patient population. The standardized implementation of a validated PROM tool in the clinical treatment of this patient population is an essential step to improve outcomes, enable the comparison of research, and support evidence-based treatment approaches.

Predicting Postoperative Satisfaction with Breasts: How Important is the Preoperative BREAST-Q Score?

BACKGROUND

The role that preoperative Satisfaction with Breast plays in a patient's postoperative course after postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) is not understood. The aim of this study is to understand the impact of the preoperative score on postoperative outcome as an independent variable.

METHODS

We examined patients who underwent PMBR between 2017 and 2021 and who completed the BREAST-Q Satisfaction with Breasts at 1 year postoperatively. Two multiple linear regression models (Model 1 with the preoperative Satisfaction with Breasts score and Model 2 without the preoperative score), likelihood ratio tests, simple t-statistics, and sample patient dataset to predict the 1 year score were performed. Multiple imputation was used to account for missing preoperative scores.

RESULTS

Overall, 2324 patients were included. Model 1 showed that the preoperative score is significantly associated with the postoperative score (β = 0.09, 95% confidence interval 0.04-0.14; p < 0.001). Comparing Model 1 and Model 2 demonstrated that including preoperative Satisfaction with Breasts in a regression significantly improves model fit (test statistic = 10.04; p = 0.0021). Using the absolute value of the t-statistics as a measure of variable importance in linear regression, the importance of the preoperative score was quantified as 3.39-more important than neoadjuvant radiation, mastectomy weight, body mass index, bilateral prophylactic mastectomy, and race, but less than adjuvant radiation, reconstruction type, and psychiatric diagnoses.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative Satisfaction with Breasts scores are an important independent predictor of postoperative satisfaction after PMBR. Just as vital sign and work-up are carefully documented before surgery, preoperative scores should be collected to pre-emptively gauge patients' satisfaction and optimize postoperative outcomes.

"Numbers call for action, personalized narratives provide support and recognition": a qualitative assessment of cancer patients' perspectives on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) feedback with narratives

PURPOSE

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires completed by patients to gain insight in their health-related quality of life. However, patients often find the interpretation of PROMS challenging. A personalized narrative, i.e., a story with patients' experiences tailored to the reader, could help explain PROMs and might be appreciated alongside numerical outcomes. We studied how cancer patients perceive PROMs feedback presented in a regular numerical and a novel narrative format.

METHODS

Cancer patients who completed PROMs in routine clinical practice were recruited. All participants received numerical feedback and a personalized narrative. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to uncover perceptions of both formats. Interviews were analyzed with an inductive reflexive approach to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients with breast cancer, melanoma, and bladder cancer participated. Thematic analysis identified six themes: "Understanding: I get the gist of it!"; "Usefulness: Tell me why I should complete PROMs"; "Format preferences: Numbers are cold, narratives are warm"; "Taking action: Can I do something about my score?"; "Personal relevance: Personalized narratives show me what life has in store for me"; and "Personal relevance: That's (not) me!" Numbers seemed to help participants act, whereas narratives may provide emotional support and recognition. Participants identified with the content of the narrative yet differed in how they related to the main character.

CONCLUSION

Personalized narratives could be a useful addition to PROMs feedback. The studied formats seem to serve different purposes; numbers help to facilitate action, personalized narratives provide recognition.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Personalized narratives may be a useful new way to communicate about quality of life to cancer survivors and help them to envision what the impact of cancer can be.

Integration of the CLEFT-Q Patient-Reported Outcome Tool into a Multidisciplinary Cleft and Craniofacial Clinic: A Proof of Concept

SUMMARY

Implementation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) tools has increased internationally in a variety of clinical settings, with emerging evidence suggesting benefits for patient satisfaction, improved patient-provider communication, and management of chronic conditions. However, integrating PROs into clinical workflow remains a barrier to implementation, with common challenges including patient completion, provider review of results, and future accessibility of data. Cleft lip and/or palate presents with a variety of aesthetic, functional, and psychosocial sequelae optimally managed by a multidisciplinary team, and the CLEFT-Q is a validated 12-module PRO that captures patient perception in these domains. Given the emerging proven benefits of using PROs in a clinical setting, the authors integrated the CLEFT-Q PRO at a multidisciplinary cleft and craniofacial clinic at a large, urban, tertiary care center. The authors collaborated with their institution's electronic health record clinical informatics team to automatically identify eligible cleft lip and/or palate patients and generate the CLEFT-Q PRO before weekly multidisciplinary cleft and craniofacial clinic days. Patient results were automatically scored, compared with age-based normative data, and populated into the electronic health record patient note. CLEFT-Q results were viewed by clinicians during patient visits to initiate module-specific discussion in relation to patient age-based normative results. Patient-specific CLEFT-Q data were also discussed during multidisciplinary cleft and craniofacial team discussions to aid in clinical decision-making. This experience may have applicability to other PRO tools in plastic surgery and other medical specialties where integrating PROs may yield superior patient experience and outcomes.

BREAST-Q REACT: Qualitative Assessment of the Design, Functionality, and Clinical Utility of a New Score Interpretation Tool

BACKGROUND

The BREAST-Q real-time engagement and communication tool (REACT) was developed to aid with BREAST-Q score interpretation and guide patient-centered care.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the perspectives of patients and providers on the design, functionality, and clinical utility of REACT and refine the REACT based on their recommendations.

METHODS

We conducted three patient focus groups with women who were at least 6 postoperative months from their postmastectomy breast reconstruction, and two provider focus groups with plastic surgeons, breast surgeons, and advanced practice providers. Focus groups were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

A total of 18 breast reconstruction patients and 14 providers participated in the focus groups. Themes identified by thematic analysis were organized into two categories: (1) design and functionality, and (2) clinical utility. On the design and functionality of REACT, four major themes were identified: visual appeal and usefulness; contextualizing results; ability to normalize patients' experiences, noting participants' concerns; and suggested modifications. On the clinical utility of REACT, three major themes were identified: potential to empower patients to communicate with their providers; increase patient and provider motivation to engage with the BREAST-Q; and effective integration into clinical workflow.

CONCLUSION

Patients and providers in this qualitative study indicated that with some modifications, REACT has a great potential to elevate the clinical utility of the BREAST-Q by enhancing patient-provider communication that can lead to patient-centered, clinically relevant action recommendations based on longitudinal BREAST-Q scores.

Nonresponse data in sexual well-being among breast reconstruction patients-who are we overlooking?

BACKGROUND

Missing data can affect the representativeness and accuracy of survey results, and sexual health-related surveys are especially at a higher risk of nonresponse due to their sensitive nature and stigma. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the proportion of patients who do not complete the BREAST-Q Sexual Well-being relative to other BREAST-Q modules and compare responders versus nonresponders of Sexual Well-being. We secondarily examined variables associated with Sexual Well-being at 1-year.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent breast reconstruction from January 2018 to December 2021 and completed any of the BREAST-Q modules postoperatively at 1-year was performed.

RESULTS

The 2941 patients were included. Of the four BREAST-Q domains, Sexual Well-being had the highest rate of nonresponse (47%). Patients who were separated (vs. married, OR = 0.69), whose primary language was not English (vs. English, OR = 0.60), and had Medicaid insurance (vs. commercial, OR = 0.67) were significantly less likely to complete the Sexual Well-being. Postmenopausal patients were significantly more likely to complete the survey than premenopausal patients. Lastly, autologous reconstruction patients were 2.93 times more likely to respond than implant-based reconstruction patients (p < 0.001) while delayed (vs. immediate, OR = 0.70, p = 0.022) and unilateral (vs. bilateral, OR = 0.80, p = 0.008) reconstruction patients were less likely to respond. History of psychiatric diagnosis, aromatase inhibitors, and immediate breast reconstruction were significantly associated with lower Sexual Well-being at 1-year.

CONCLUSION

Sexual Well-being is the least frequently completed BREAST-Q domain, and there are demographic and clinical differences between responders and nonresponders. We encourage providers to recognize patterns in nonresponse data for Sexual-Well-being to ensure that certain patient population's sexual health concerns are not overlooked.

Analyzing mastectomy and reconstruction weight in immediate autologous breast reconstruction: A preliminary study

BACKGROUND

This study aims to explore the ideal breast size by assessing the relationship between mastectomy to free flap weight ratio and complications as well as patient-reported outcomes in autologous breast reconstruction (ABR).

METHOD

A retrospective review of patients undergoing bilateral immediate ABR with mastectomy and flap weights available was completed. Patients were divided into three groups based on the ratio of mastectomy to flap weights. The patients were grouped as "maintained" if the flap weight was within 10% of the mastectomy weight. Patients with a weight difference greater than 10% were used to declare "downsized" or "upsized." Outcomes included complications and four domains of the BREAST-Q at 1-year postoperatively.

RESULTS

Three hundred and fifty-nine patients were included in the analysis, of which 112 were downsized, 91 maintained, and 156 upsized, respectively. Presence of complications did not significantly differ among the groups. At 1-year postoperatively, Sexual Well-being significantly differed (p = 0.033). Between preoperative and 1 year, patients who upsized experienced an improvement in Satisfaction with Breasts by 16 points (p < 0.001), while patients who downsized experienced a decline in Physical Well-being of the Chest by 7 points (p = 0.016). Multivariable linear regression model showed that Sexual Well-being was 13 points lower in the downsized cohort than in the maintained cohort (β = -13, 95% confidence interval: -21 to -5.4; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Although complication rates do not significantly differ between the three cohorts, patients who downsize may have lower Sexual Well-being postoperatively. Surgeons should consider our preliminary findings to counsel patients preoperatively about the predicted breast size and the impact of downsizing on sexual health.

Health Care Value in Plastic Surgery Practice

SUMMARY

As value-based care gains traction in response to towering health care expenditures and issues of health care inequity, hospital capacity, and labor shortages, it is important to consider how a value-based approach can be achieved in plastic surgery. Value is defined as outcomes divided by costs across entire cycles of care. Drawing on previous studies and policies, this article identifies key opportunities in plastic surgery to move the levers of costs and outcomes to deliver higher value care. Specifically, outcomes in plastic surgery should include conventional measures of complication rates and patient-reported outcome measures to drive quality improvement and benchmark payments. Meanwhile, cost reduction in plastic surgery can be achieved through value-based payment reform, efficient workflows, evidence-based and cost-conscious selection of medical devices, and greater use of outpatient surgical facilities. Lastly, the authors discuss how the diminished presence of third-party payers in aesthetic surgery exemplifies the cost-conscious and patient-centered nature of value-based plastic surgery. To lead in future health policy and care delivery reform, plastic surgeons should strive for high-value care, remain open to new ways of care delivery, and understand how plastic surgery fits into overall health care delivery.

Examining Race and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy with Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Little is known regarding racial differences in satisfaction and quality of life (QOL) after contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM). In this study, we aim to characterize associations between race, and postoperative satisfaction and well-being, utilizing the validated BREAST-Q patient-reported outcome measure.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were eligible if they were diagnosed with stage 0-III unilateral breast cancer and underwent mastectomy with immediate reconstruction at our institution between 2016 and 2022. BREAST-Q surveys were administered in routine clinical care preoperatively and postoperatively to assess QOL. We assessed whether the relationship between race, and domains of satisfaction with breasts and psychosocial well-being differed by receipt of CPM compared with unilateral mastectomy at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years following reconstruction.

RESULTS

Of 3334 women, 2040 (61%) underwent unilateral mastectomy and 1294 (39%) underwent CPM. Compared with White and Asian women who received CPM, Black women who underwent CPM were more likely to have higher BMI (p < 0.001), undergo autologous reconstruction (p = 0.006), and receive postmastectomy radiation (PMRT) (p < 0.001). There was no association between race and domains of satisfaction of breasts or psychosocial well-being for women who underwent unilateral mastectomy (p = 0.6 and p > 0.9, respectively) or CPM (p = 0.8 and p = 0.9, respectively). PMRT was negatively associated with both satisfaction with breasts (p < 0.001) and psychosocial well-being (p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in satisfaction with breasts and psychosocial well-being at 3-year follow-up were not associated with race but rather treatment variables, particularly the receipt of PMRT. Further investigations with a larger and more diverse population are needed to validate these findings.

Adaptation and multicentre validation of a patient-centred outcome scale for people severely ill with COVID (IPOS-COV)

BACKGROUND

Patient-centred measures to capture symptoms and concerns have rarely been reported in severe COVID. We adapted and tested the measurement properties of the proxy version of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale-IPOS-COV for severe COVID using psychometric approach.

METHODS

We consulted experts and followed consensus-based standards for the selection of health status measurement instruments and United States Food and Drug Administration guidance for adaptation and analysis. Exploratory Factor Analysis and clinical perspective informed subscales. We tested the internal consistency reliability, calculated item total correlations, examined re-test reliability in stable patients, and also evaluated inter-rater reproducibility. We examined convergent and divergent validity of IPOS-COV with the Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Scale and evaluated known-groups validity. Ability to detect change was examined.

RESULTS

In the adaptation phase, 6 new items were added, 7 items were removed from the original measure. The recall period was revised to be the last 12-24 h to capture fast deterioration in COVID. General format and response options of the original Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale were preserved. Data from 572 patients with COVID from across England and Wales seen by palliative care services were included. Four subscales were supported by the 4-factor solution explaining 53.5% of total variance. Breathlessness-Agitation and Gastro-intestinal subscales demonstrated good reliability with high to moderate (a = 0.70 and a = 0.67) internal consistency, and item-total correlations (0.62-0.21). All except the Flu subscale discriminated well between patients with differing disease severity. Inter-rater reliability was fair with ICC of 0.40 (0.3-0.5, 95% CI, n = 324). Correlations between the subscales and AKPS as predicted were weak (r = 0.13-0.26) but significant (p < 0.01). Breathlessness-Agitation and Drowsiness-Delirium subscales demonstrated good divergent validity. Patients with low oxygen saturation had higher mean Breathlessness-Agitation scores (M = 5.3) than those with normal levels (M = 3.4), t = 6.4 (186), p < 0.001. Change in Drowsiness-Delirium subscale correctly classified patients who died.

CONCLUSIONS

IPOS-COV is the first patient-centred measure adapted for severe COVID to support timely management. Future studies could further evaluate its responsiveness and clinical utility with clinimetric approaches.

How to make PROMs work: qualitative insights from leaders at United States hospitals with successful PROMs programs

PURPOSE

Elucidate facilitators, barriers, and key lessons learned regarding the implementation of system-wide clinical patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) programs among United States (US) healthcare leaders.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 35 US healthcare leaders, including chief-level executives, data directors, PROM directors, and department chairs involved in PROM implementation across seven diverse healthcare systems from February to June 2020. Transcripts were coded, evaluated for qualitative themes, and categorized according to the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR).

RESULTS

According to US hospital leaders with experience in existing clinical PROM programs, there are facilitators and barriers to implementation success in each CFIR domain. Allowing clinicians to select PROM measures and ensuring a user-friendly data platform (intervention); adapting data collection to patient home environments (outer setting); informing clinicians of the multi-faceted use of PROM data for research, clinical care, and business (inner setting); implementing PROM education earlier into clinician training (characteristics of individuals); and establishing specialty-agnostic PROM implementation teams (process) were among key facilitators to implementation success.

CONCLUSION

Leaders of geographically and clinically diverse PROM programs in the US identify common themes that facilitate successful implementation. Drivers of success depend on factors within and outside the clinical environment. These findings may serve to guide both establishing new PROM programs and refining existing PROM programs.