The health burden of breast hypertrophy.

Women seeking consultation for the surgical relief of symptoms associated with breast hypertrophy have been the focus of many studies. In contrast, little is known about those women with breast hypertrophy who do not seek symptomatic relief. The purpose of this study was to describe the health burden of breast hypertrophy by using a set of validated questionnaires and to compare women with breast hypertrophy who seek surgical treatment with those who do not. In addition, this latter group was compared with a group of control women without breast hypertrophy. Women seeking consultation for surgery were recruited from 14 plastic-surgery practices. Control subjects were recruited by advertisements in primary-care offices and newspapers. Women were asked to complete a self-report questionnaire that included the European Quality of Life (EuroQol) questionnaire, McGill Pain Questionnaire, Multidimensional Body Self Relations Questionnaire (MBSRQ), the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire, and questions regarding breast-related symptoms, comorbidities, and bra size. Descriptive statistics were compiled for three groups of women: (1) hypertrophy patients seeking surgical care, (2) hypertrophy control subjects (those whose reported bra-cup size was a D or larger), and (3) normal control subjects (those whose reported bra-cup size was an A, B, or C). The multiple linear regression method was used to compare the health burdens across groups while adjusting for other variables. Two hundred ninety-one women seeking surgical care and 195 control subjects were enrolled in the study. The 184 control subjects with bra-cup information available were further separated into 88 hypertrophy control subjects and 96 normal control subjects. In the control group, bra-cup size was correlated with health-burden measures, whereas in the surgical candidates, it was not. When scores were compared across the three groups, significant differences were found in all health-burden measures. The surgical candidates scored more poorly on the EuroQol utility, McGill pain rating index, MBSRQ appearance evaluation, physical component scale of the SF-36, and on breast symptoms than did the two control groups. In addition, the hypertrophy control subjects scored more poorly than the normal control subjects. With multiple linear regression analysis incorporating important potential confounders, the poorer scores in the surgical candidates remained statistically significant. It was concluded that breast hypertrophy in those seeking surgical care and those not seeking surgery has a significant impact on women's quality of life as measured by validated and widely used self-report instruments including the EuroQol, MBSRQ, McGill Pain Questionnaire, and the SF-36. Likewise, a new assessment instrument for breast-related symptoms also demonstrated greater symptomatology in women with breast hypertrophy.

Nutritional status classification in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Nutrition Status Classification scheme uses clinical data that are routinely collected on admission or shortly thereafter for quick inpatient nutrition screening. In this scheme, patients are assigned to 1 of 4 classification levels according to 7 individual indicators. The indicators include nutrition history, unintentional weight loss as a percent of usual body weight, percent of ideal body weight, diet, diagnosis, albumin, and total lymphocyte count. After ratings (1 to 4) are assigned to each of the 7 indicators, overall nutritional status for each patient is determined by an algorithm. The VA classification system includes many of the same criteria used in other nutritional status classifications. Where it differs is in the greater emphasis on the use of objective criteria and in the rigorous evaluation of reliability and validity that went into its development. Because of these extra measures, the VA classification can be used for prioritizing workload, as well as for determining staff requirements and for comparing workload and productivity across health care facilities. So that others might benefit from using this system, this article provides information on how the classification scheme was developed and explains how it is used.

Outcomes after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: comparison of mortality defined by centralized VA Patient Treatment File data versus hospital-based chart review.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair have been reported by individual Veterans Affairs medical centers (VAMCs) and for the entire VA patient population. PURPOSE: This study was done to determine whether outcomes defined using VA Patient Treatment File (PTF) data were comparable to those defined by direct chart review in those undergoing repair of intact AAA. METHODS: Focused chart review was performed in all veterans undergoing such AAA repair in a sample of VAMCs (n = 5) for separate 1-year periods during fiscal years (FY) 1991-1993. A previous report of outcomes after AAA repair for all veterans in DRGs 110 and 111 during FY 1991-1993 was based on PTF data that were further analyzed by Patient Management Category (PMC) software. Outcomes after AAA repair were defined in a similar fashion using PTF data and PMC analysis in the same sample VAMCs for which direct chart review data were available. Outcomes defined by chart review were then compared to those based on PTF data. RESULTS: Three of the 69 patients undergoing repair of intact AAA for which chart review data were available were assigned to DRGs other than 110 and 111 and, by definition, were not included in the PTF-derived database. Nine of 10 additional patients undergoing chart review were not identified as having undergone AAA repair by PMC software: 7 had procedure codes 39.25 instead of more standard AAA repair codes 38.34 or 38.44. Two additional patients with codes 38.64 or 38.66 were not identified as having undergone AAA repair by PMC software. The 10th patient not included in the PTF-derived database underwent additional operative procedures. Of the 13 patients missed by the combined PTF and PMC outcome analyses but identified by chart review, none died or had cardiac complications. One of these 13 patients had pulmonary complications based on chart review and PTF but was excluded by PMC analysis. There remained a total of 56 patients at the five sample VAMCs common to the PTF-derived and chart-derived databases identified as having undergone repair of intact AAA. There were two in-hospital deaths in these patients, and both were identified by each approach to outcome assessment. Four of these 56 patients had postoperative cardiac complications (ICD-9-CM code 997. 10) which were identified by both PTF and chart review. Postoperative pulmonary complications (ICD-9-CM code 997.30) were present in 4 of the 56 cases and were also identified by both PTF-based and chart-based outcome analyses. CONCLUSIONS: All deaths as well as cardiac or respiratory complications identified by chart review at the study hospitals were also affirmed by the PTF. Due to study methodologies (which restricted analysis to those in DRGs 110 and 111 and which included secondary analyses of PTF data by PMC software), 19% of patients who underwent repair of intact AAA identified by hospital-based chart review were excluded from the PTF-based outcome analysis. Outcomes defined using large databases such as the VA PTF may be comparable to those defined by chart review if study methodologies permit. Discrepancies in outcome assessment between direct chart review and large database analysis in the present study were due to methodologies used, not to deficiencies, per se, in PTF data.

Health status in veterans undergoing noninvasive lower extremity arterial evaluation.

The health status of outpatients (n = 299) undergoing lower extremity arterial Doppler studies (LES) in a Veterans Affairs Medical Center-based vascular laboratory was assessed from 9/95 through 6/96 using the SF-36 Health Survey. The purpose of this study was to compare health status of these outpatients to national norms and to determine whether Doppler-derived ankle/brachial indices (ABI) correlated with the eight health concepts measured by the SF-36 Health Survey. Physical functioning (PF), role limitations by physical illness (RP), bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (VT), social functioning (SF), role limitations by emotional illness (RE), and mental health (MH) were more impaired in study patients (65.9 +/- 9.6 years of age) undergoing LES than national norms for males >/=65 years old (P < 0.0001). In fact, each health concept was below the 25th percentile of the national norms. PF was 33.4 +/- 22.4 for outpatients compared to the national norm of 65.8 +/- 28.3. Physical functioning was the only SF-36 health concept defined above which correlated with lowest ABI (r = 0.15; P = 0.012), adjusting for age but not comorbidities. Veterans undergoing only carotid duplex during the study period (n = 169) were compared to the veterans undergoing only LES (n = 251) during the study. PF, RP, BP, GH, VT, SF, and RE were significantly more impaired in those undergoing only LES compared with carotid duplex (P < 0.05). Veteran outpatients referred to a vascular laboratory have broad-based and profound impairments in health status. In addition, only physical functioning correlated with ABI, a measure of lower extremity arterial disease severity.