IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v27y2018i7-8p1464-1474.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predictive factors of satisfaction and quality of life after immediate breast reconstruction using the BREAST‐Q©

Author

Listed:
  • Carmen Cereijo‐Garea
  • Salvador Pita‐Fernández
  • Benigno Acea‐Nebril
  • Raquel Rey‐Villar
  • Alejandra García‐Novoa
  • Cristina Varela‐Lamas
  • Sergio Builes‐Ramirez
  • Teresa Seoane‐Pillado
  • Vanesa Balboa‐Barreiro

Abstract

Aims and objectives To analyse quality of life and satisfaction after immediate breast reconstruction due to cancer and its determining factors. Background Studying breast reconstruction is important because of its frequency and variability. In addition to the surgical results, it is necessary to analyse the quality of life and patient satisfaction using a specific tool. Design methods An ambispective design was used (n = 101; α = 0.05; precision = 10%), studying anthropometric, sociocultural data, Fagerström test and the BREAST‐Q© questionnaire. A logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables associated with quality of life and satisfaction. Results Mean age of the patients on diagnosis was 44.87 ± 8.5 years. Forty‐one of the patients were carried out a skin‐sparing mastectomy (42.7%). Immediate reconstruction was performed with implant in 73 (74.5%). The domains on the BREAST‐Q© for quality of life with the lowest scores were physical well‐being chest (74) and sexual well‐being (61.5). The satisfaction domain with the lowest score was with the breast (59). The variables associated with the worst quality of life in the physical well‐being chest domain were the skin‐sparing mastectomy (OR, 4.2; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.2–14.1) and lymphedema (OR, 12.9; 95% CI, 1.0–159.9). Antibody treatment was associated with a worse score on the psychosocial well‐being domain (OR, 4.25; 95% CI, 1.0–18.0) and sexual well‐being domain (OR, 7.34; 95% CI, 0.9–54.6). Satisfaction was associated with nicotine dependence on the breast and outcome scale. The higher the dependence on nicotine, the greater the dissatisfaction with the breasts (OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.1–5.3) and with the result (OR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.0–5.9). Conclusions The type of treatment and lymphedema modify the patients’ quality of life. Nicotine dependence is associated with lower satisfaction with the breast and with the outcome. Relevance to clinical practice This study suggests the need for multidisciplinary attention during the first year of adjuvant treatment despite the benefits of immediate reconstruction. It shows the need for preoperative assessment of the level of nicotine dependence, anxiety and depression of smoking patients before preoperative counselling.

Suggested Citation

  • Carmen Cereijo‐Garea & Salvador Pita‐Fernández & Benigno Acea‐Nebril & Raquel Rey‐Villar & Alejandra García‐Novoa & Cristina Varela‐Lamas & Sergio Builes‐Ramirez & Teresa Seoane‐Pillado & Vanesa Balbo, 2018. "Predictive factors of satisfaction and quality of life after immediate breast reconstruction using the BREAST‐Q©," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(7-8), pages 1464-1474, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:27:y:2018:i:7-8:p:1464-1474
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14291
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14291
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.14291?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:27:y:2018:i:7-8:p:1464-1474. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.