Skip to main content
Book cover

Breast Reconstruction pp 1247–1259Cite as

The Breast Reconstruction Satisfaction Questionnaire BRECON-31©: Dimensionality, Clinimetric Properties, and Affirmative Testing

  • Chapter

  • 203 Accesses

Abstract

The BRECON-31© is a patient reported outcome measure (PROM) that is specific to women who have undergone post-mastectomy breast reconstruction. The intention is to measure a woman’s satisfaction and quality of life as it relates to her breast reconstruction. Patients were involved in the generation and reduction of items, ensuring content and face validity of the questionnaire. Nine hundred and thirteen items were ultimately distilled to 31 using a variety of statistical means and principal components analysis. Eight subscales emerged, including self-image, arm concerns, intimacy, satisfaction, recovery, self-consciousness, expectations and appearance. Two additional subscales involving abdominal and nipple items, which apply to some but not all women, comprise a total of 45 questions and ten subscales. Development of the questionnaire illuminated differences between surgeons and patients in the appraisal of what constitutes a satisfactory outcome of breast reconstruction. The BRECON-31© has been affirmed in a test pool of women, and represents a valid and reliable instrument for improved outcome measurement in breast reconstruction.

Keywords

  • Breast Reconstruction
  • Patient Report Outcome Measure
  • Immediate Breast Reconstruction
  • Test Pool
  • Patient Focus Group

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-18726-6_123
  • Chapter length: 13 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   299.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-319-18726-6
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Hardcover Book
USD   379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions
Fig. 123.1
Fig. 123.2
Fig. 123.3
Fig. 123.4
Fig. 123.5
Fig. 123.6
Fig. 123.7
Fig. 123.8

References

  1. Chesney A, McMillan C, Scott A, Pusic A, Lipa J, Snell L (2013) Assessing quality of life in patients awaiting delayed breast reconstruction. Can J Plast Surg 21(2):109–146

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alberta Health Services (2013) Breast reconstruction following prophylactic or therapeutic mastectomy for Breast Cancer. http://albertahealthservices.ca/hp/if-hp-cancer-guide-br016-breast-reconstruciton.pdf. Accessed 5/7/14

  3. Patel SA, Topham NS (2010) Breast reconstruction. In: Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M, Osbourne CK (eds) Diseases of the breast, 4th edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 529–532

    Google Scholar 

  4. Eltahir Y, Werners L, Dreise M, Emmichoven I, Werker P, Bock G (2014) Which Breast Is the Best? Successful Autologous or Alloplastic Breast Reconstruction: Patient-Reported Quality-of-Life Outcomes. Plast Recon Surg 135(1):43–50

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fitzpatrick AM, Gao LL, Smith BL, Cetrulo CL Jr, Colwell AS, Winograd JM, Yaremchuk MJ, Austen WG Jr, Liao EC (2012) Cost and outcome analysis of breast reconstruction paradigm shift. Plast Reconstr Surg 130(5S–1):75

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Blondeel N, Vanderstraeten GG, Monstrey SJ, Van Landuyt K, Tonnard P, Lysens R, Boeckx WD, Matton G (1997) The donor site morbidity of fee DIEP flaps and free TRAM flaps for breast reconstruction. Br J Plast Surg 50(5):322–330

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Williams B (1994) Patient satisfaction: a valid concept? Soc Sci Med 38(4):509–516

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Cano SJ, Browne JP, Lamping DL (2004) Patient-based measures of outcome in plastic surgery: current approaches and future directions. Br J Plast Surg 57(1):1–11

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  9. Temple CL, Tse R, Bettger-Hahn M, MacDermid J, Gan BS, Ross DC (2006) Sensibility following innervated free TRAM flap for breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 117(70):2119–2127

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  10. Temple CL, Ross DC, Kim S, Tse R, Bettger-Hahn M, Gan BS, MacDermid J (2009) Sensibility following innervated free TRAM flap for breast reconstruction: Part II. Innervation improves patient-rated quality of life. Plast Reconstr Surg 124(5):1419–1425

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Sprangers MA, Groenvold M, Arraras JI, Franklin J, te Velde A, Muller M, Franzini L, Williams A, de Haes HC, Hopwood P, Cull A, Aaronson NK (1996) The European organization for research and treatment of cancer breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire module: first results from a Three-Country Study. J Clin Oncol 14(10):2756–2768

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Brady MJ, Cella CF, Mo F, Bonomi AE, Tulsky DS, Lloyd SR, Deasy S, Cobleigh M, Shiomoto G (1997) Reliability and validation of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-breast quality-of-life instrument. J Clin Oncol 15(3):974–986

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. King MT, Kenny P, Shiell A, Hall J, Boyages J (2000) Quality of life three months and one year after the first treatment for early stage breast cancer: influence of treatment and patient characteristics. Qual Life Res 9(7):789–800

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  14. Baxter N, Goodwin PJ, McLeod RS et al (2006) Reliability and validity of the body image after breast cancer questionnaire. Breast J 12(30):221–232

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  15. Alderman AK, Wilkins EG, Lowery JC, Kim M, Davis JA (2000) Determinants of patient satisfaction in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 106(4):769–776

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  16. Wilkins EG, Cederna PS, Lowery JC, Davis JA, Kim HM, Roth RS, Goldfarb S, Izenberg PH, Houin HP, Shaheen KW (2000) Prospective analysis of psychosocial outcomes in breast reconstruction: one-year postoperative results from the Michigan breast reconstruction outcome study. Plast Reconstr Surg 106(5):1014–1025

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Pusic AL, Chen CM, Cano S, Klassen A, McCarthy C, Collins ED, Cordeiro PG (2007) Measuring quality of life in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery: a systematic review of patient-reported outcomes instruments. Plast Reconstr Surg 120(4):823–837

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee C, Sunu C, Pignon M (2009) Patient-reported outcomes of breast reconstruction after mastectomy: a systematic review. J Am Coll Surg 209(1):123–133

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  19. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2006) U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Available at www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm071975.pdf. Accessed 5/7/14

  20. Temple CL, Cook EF, Ross DC, Bettger-Hahn M, MacDermid J (2010) Development of a breast reconstruction satisfaction questionnaire (BRECON): dimensionality and clinical importance of breast symptoms, donor site issues, patient expectations, and relationships. J Clin Oncol 101(3):209–216

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kim JO, Mueller CW (1978) Introduction to factor analysis: what it is and how to do it. Sage Publications, Thousand Oakes

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kim JO, Mueller CW (1978) Factor analysis: statistical method and practical issues. Sage Publications, Thousand Oakes

    Google Scholar 

  23. Temple-Oberle CL, Cook EF, Bettger-Hahn M, Mychailyshyn N, Naeem H, Macdermid J (2012) Development of a breast reconstruction satisfaction questionnaire (BRECON-31©): principal components analysis and clinimetric properties. J Clin Oncol 106(7):799–806

    Google Scholar 

  24. Temple-Oberle CL, Ayeni O, Cook EF, Bettger-Hahn M, Mychailyshyn N, MacDermid J (2013) The breast reconstruction satisfaction questionnaire (BRECON-31): an affirmative analysis. J Clin Oncol 107(5):451–455

    Google Scholar 

  25. Korus L, Zhong T, Wu A (2013) Patient reported outcome measures in reconstructive breast surgery. Can J Plast Surg 21(2):138

    Google Scholar 

  26. Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Klok JA, Cordeiro PG, Cano SJ (2009) Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: the BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg 124(2):345–353

    PubMed  CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  27. McCarthy CM, Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Scott A, Vanlaeken N, Lennox PA, Alderman AK, Mehrara BJ, Disa JJ, Cordeiro PG, Pusic AL (2010) Patient satisfaction with postmastectomy breast reconstruction: a comparison of saline and silicone implants. Cancer 116(24):5584–5591

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  28. Macadam SA, Ho AL, Lennox PA, Pusic AL (2013) Patient-reported satisfaction and health-related quality of life following breast reconstruction: a comparison of shaped cohesive gel and round cohesive gel implant recipients. Plast Recosntr Surg 131(3):431–441

    CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  29. Temple-Oberle C, Ayeni O, Webb C, Bettger-Hahn M, Ayeni O, Mychailyshyn N (2014) Shared decision-making: Applying a person-centered approach to tailored breast reconstruction information provides high satisfaction across a variety of breast reconstruction options. J Surg Oncol 110(7):796–800

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 107 Wiggins Road, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5E5, Canada

    Eoin McFadden B.Sc.

  2. Divisions of Plastic Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, 1331 29th Street NW, Calgary, AB, T2N4N2, Canada

    Claire Temple-Oberle M.D., M.Sc.

Authors
  1. Eoin McFadden B.Sc.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claire Temple-Oberle M.D., M.Sc.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claire Temple-Oberle M.D., M.Sc. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Tustin, California, USA

    Melvin A. Shiffman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

McFadden, E., Temple-Oberle, C. (2016). The Breast Reconstruction Satisfaction Questionnaire BRECON-31©: Dimensionality, Clinimetric Properties, and Affirmative Testing. In: Shiffman, M. (eds) Breast Reconstruction. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18726-6_123

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18726-6_123

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-18725-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-18726-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)