Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Feb;69(2):149-62.
doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2015.11.013. Epub 2015 Nov 26.

The BREAST-Q in surgical research: A review of the literature 2009-2015

Wess A Cohen  1 , Lily R Mundy  2 , Tiffany N S Ballard  3 , Anne Klassen  4 , Stefan J Cano  5 , John Browne  6 , Andrea L Pusic  7
Affiliations
Review

The BREAST-Q in surgical research: A review of the literature 2009-2015

Wess A Cohen et al. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2016 Feb.

Abstract

Background: Health outcomes research has gained considerable traction over the past decade as the medical community attempts to move beyond traditional outcome measures such as morbidity and mortality. Since its inception in 2009, the BREAST-Q has provided meaningful and reliable information regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and patient satisfaction for use in both clinical practice and research. In this study, we review how researchers have used the BREAST-Q and how it has enhanced our understanding and practice of plastic and reconstructive breast surgery.

Methods: An electronic literature review was performed to identify publications that used the BREAST-Q to assess patient outcomes. Studies developing and/or validating the BREAST-Q or an alternate patient-reported outcome measure (PROM), review papers, conference abstracts, discussions, comments and/or responses to previously published papers, studies that modified a version of BREAST-Q, and studies not published in English were excluded.

Results: Our literature review yielded 214 unique articles, 49 of which met our inclusion criteria. Important trends and highlights were further examined.

Discussion: The BREAST-Q has provided important insights into breast surgery highlighted by literature concerning autologous reconstruction, implant type, fat grafting, and patient education. The BREAST-Q has increased the use of PROMs in breast surgery and provided numerous important insights in its brief existence. The increased interest in PROMs as well as the underutilized potential of the BREAST-Q should permit its continued use and ability to foster innovations and improve quality of care.

Keywords: BREAST-Q; Breast surgery; PROMS; Patient reported outcome measures; Patient reported outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Confliction of Interest Drs. Pusic, Klassen, and Cano are co-developers of the BREAST-Q, which is owned by Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. They receive a portion of licensing fees (royalty payments) when the BREAST-Q is used in industry sponsored clinical trials.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
BREAST-Q conceptual framework. (Pusic A, Klassen A, Scott A, et al. Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: the BREAST-Q. with permission.)
Figure 2
Figure 2
Article inclusions and exclusions
Figure 3
Figure 3
Frequency of BREAST-Q by year.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Domain and subdomain frequency.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Curtin CM, Chung KC. A reflection of outcomes research and its impact on the practice of hand surgery. The Journal of hand surgery, European volume. 2014;39:790–3. - PubMed
    1. Cano SJ, Klassen A, Pusic AL. The science behind quality-of-life measurement: a primer for plastic surgeons. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2009;123:98e–106e. - PubMed
    1. Cano SJ, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Cordeiro PG, Pusic AL. The BREAST-Q: further validation in independent clinical samples. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2012;129:293–302. - PubMed
    1. Cordeiro PG. Breast reconstruction after surgery for breast cancer. The New England journal of medicine. 2008;359:1590–601. - PubMed
    1. Saulis AS, Mustoe TA, Fine NA. A retrospective analysis of patient satisfaction with immediate postmastectomy breast reconstruction: comparison of three common procedures. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2007;119:1669–76. discussion 77–8. - PubMed