Abstract
Abstract
Background
To examine the acceptability of a Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) that assesses perceptions and experiences of implants for breast reconstruction or augmentation, and the feasibility of implementing it in the Australian Breast Device Registry (ABDR).
Methods
The BREAST-Q Implant Surveillance (BREAST-Q IS) is a 5-question PROM derived from the BREAST-Q questionnaire. It assesses perceptions of breast appearance and sensation, and experiences of pain. Breast implant recipients (recruited via community networks, social media and notices in surgeons’ rooms) and surgeons contributing to the ABDR were invited to review the BREAST-Q-IS. Participation was by individual semi-structured interviews by telephone or email, or by completion of a paper questionnaire. Transcripts of audio recordings and emailed text were analysed thematically.
Results
Twenty one breast implant recipients (10 after reconstruction and 11 augmentation), 8 surgeons (five plastic, three breast) and 2 medical professionals performing cosmetic surgeries were interviewed. Six themes were identified: Overall impression, Emotional response to the BREAST-Q IS, Method of follow-up, Suggested improvements, Group variation, and Potential Clinical utility. Overall, breast implant recipients and surgeons found the BREAST-Q IS to be acceptable and unlikely to provoke strong emotional reactions. Email was the preferred mode of contact. Most suggested improvements were to add questions. Surgeons expressed concern that subjective responses to the PROM might not accurately reflect experiences and that the PROM would predict need for revision rather than device failure.
Conclusion
This study supports the acceptability and feasibility of BREAST-Q IS as a PROM for recipients of breast implants. Further validation of the Breast-Q IS is required.
Funder
Department of Health, Australian Government
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Information Management,Health Informatics
Reference26 articles.
1. Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care. (2014). Framework for Australian clinical quality registries
https://www.safetyandquality.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Framework-for-Australian-Clinical-Quality-Registries.pdf
. Accessed 12 Oct 2018.
2. Wilcox, N., & McNeil, J. J. (2016). Clinical quality registries have the potential to drive improvements in the appropriateness of care. The Medical Journal of Australia, 205(10), S27–S29.
3. Administration USDoHaHSFaD. (2009). Guidance for industry patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims
https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidances/ucm193282.pdf
. Accessed 12 Oct 2018.
4. Black, N. (2013). Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ, 346(f167).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Black+Patient+reported+outcome+measures+could+help+transform+healthcare.+BMJ%2C+346(f167)
5. Rotenstein, L. S., Huckman, R. S., & Wagle, N. W. (2017). Making patients and doctors happier - the potential of patient-reported outcomes. The New England Journal of Medicine, 377(14), 1309–1312.
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献