Finnish translation, validation, and reproducibility of BREAST-Q modules relevant to breast cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer and its treatments can have a marked impact on the patient health-related quality of life. The aim of this study was to produce and validate Finnish versions of the breast-conserving treatment, mastectomy and breast reconstruction modules of the BREAST-Q, a patient-reported outcome tool designed specifically for women undergoing treatment for breast cancer. METHODS: The relevant BREAST-Q modules were translated to Finnish according to established guidelines. Altogether 777 preoperative women were recruited at the Breast Surgery Unit and the Plastic Surgery Unit of Helsinki University Hospital between December 2019 and March 2021. This included 541 patients scheduled for breast-conserving surgery, 86 for mastectomy, and 150 for breast reconstruction. Postoperative patients were recruited through a postal survey, approaching 500 women operated for breast cancer in 2017, including 250 women who had undergone breast-conserving surgery and 250 women who had undergone mastectomy, as well as 339 women who had undergone breast reconstruction between August 2017 and July 2019. The patients were invited to fill the BREAST-Q modules relevant to their treatment and the general health-related quality-of-life instrument SF-36. A repeat administration of the BREAST-Q was done 2 weeks later. RESULTS: A total of 665 (41%) women participated in the study, 339 (44%) preoperatively and 326 (39%) postoperatively. The BREAST-Q subscales showed high internal consistency with most Cronbach's alphas > 0.8. The repeatability of the subscales was excellent with most intra-class correlation coefficients > 0.75. Low or negligible correlation was observed between BREAST-Q subscales and SF-36 domains. CONCLUSIONS: The Finnish version of the BREAST-Q modules breast-conserving treatment, mastectomy, and breast reconstruction performs well in assessing the health-related quality of life of women undergoing surgery for breast cancer or breast reconstruction.

Immediate versus delayed breast reconstruction: Long-term follow-up on health-related quality of life and satisfaction with breasts.

INTRODUCTION: Health-related quality of life (HRQL) can be improved by breast reconstruction following mastectomy. The optimal timing of the reconstruction remains unclear. METHODS: A cross-sectional study on 338 women who had undergone immediate or delayed breast reconstruction between 08/2017 and 07/2019 was performed. The postoperative HRQL was assessed using the BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module and the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36). Regression analysis was performed for group-wise comparison. RESULTS: A total of 146 (43%) patients participated. Seventy-seven patients (53%) had undergone immediate, and 69 patients (47%) had delayed reconstruction. The median age was 55 years (interquartile ratio [IQR] 50-62) for the Immeda group te, and 60 years (IQR 54-65) for the delayed reconstruction group. The median follow-up time was 2.3 years (IQR 1.8-2.9). No difference between the groups was detected in satisfaction with breasts (median 61, IQR 53-71 vs. 62, IQR 46-71, p = 0.62), physical well-being of the chest (median 100, IQR 80-100 vs. 100, IQR 80-100, p = 0.95) or psychosocial well-being (median 69, IQR 54-83 vs. 62, IQR 54-74, p = 0.19). No difference was detected in the SF-36 domains either. CONCLUSIONS: The timing of the breast reconstruction does not affect the postoperative HRQL. Patients with both immediate and delayed breast reconstruction reported high satisfaction with the breast and psychosocial well-being.

Health-Related Quality of Life After Breast Reconstruction: Comparing Outcomes Between Reconstruction Techniques Using the BREAST-Q.

BACKGROUND: Reconstruction of the breast following mastectomy can improve patients' health-related quality of life (HRQL). We aimed to assess HRQL in women after mastectomy and breast reconstruction and to identify differences in HRQL related to the reconstruction method used. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed on patients who had undergone breast reconstruction in Helsinki University Hospital between 08/2017 and 7/2019. The postoperative HRQL was assessed using the BREAST-Q (2.0) Reconstruction Module. The results were compared between patients with different reconstruction methods using the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: A total of 146 patients were identified. Microvascular flaps (n = 77) were the most common method for primary breast reconstruction, followed by latissimus dorsi (LD) flaps (n = 45), fat grafting (n = 18) and implant reconstruction (n = 6). The satisfaction with breasts was high in all groups (median 61, IQR 49-71). The physical well-being of the chest was high regardless of the reconstructive method (median 100, IQR 80-100). However, women with fat grafting reported more adverse effects of radiation (median 17, IQR 14-17 vs. 18, IQR 17-18 for other groups, p = 0.02). Donor site morbidity was low, and patients reported high satisfaction with the back (median 66/100, IQR57-90) and abdomen (median 9/12, IQR 8-10), and physical well-being of the back (median 61/100, IQR 53-70) and abdomen (median 65/100, IQR 60-86). CONCLUSIONS: The patient-reported HRQL after breast reconstruction is high. Most women report being satisfied with the reconstruction, irrespective of the reconstruction method used. The reconstruction method can thus be chosen individually in cooperation between the patient and the surgeon.