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
. 2019 Apr;143(4):1010-1017.
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000005426.

Development and Validation of a Nipple-Specific Scale for the BREAST-Q to Assess Patient-Reported Outcomes following Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

Affiliations

Development and Validation of a Nipple-Specific Scale for the BREAST-Q to Assess Patient-Reported Outcomes following Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

Anne Warren Peled et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 Apr.

Abstract

Background: Nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction has become increasingly popular for prophylactic and therapeutic indications. Patient-reported outcomes instruments such as the BREAST-Q provide important information regarding patient satisfaction and aesthetic and functional outcomes. However, a validated patient-reported outcomes scale specifically addressing nipple-related outcomes following nipple-sparing mastectomy is not currently available.

Methods: The authors developed a new scale measuring nipple outcomes by adapting nipple reconstruction questions from the BREAST-Q breast reconstruction module. Patients completed the questions using the think-aloud method and underwent semistructured cognitive interviews to discuss their nipple-sparing mastectomy experience to elicit new concepts. Interviews were coded and additional questions were added based on this analysis after receiving additional input from a multidisciplinary group of breast cancer providers. The final scale was distributed electronically to a larger group with solicitation for any issues that were not addressed in the question set.

Results: Ten patients completed the initial questionnaire. Analysis of the cognitive interviews identified nipple sensation, position, projection, scarring, symmetry, and surgical expectations as key content areas. After revising the questionnaire, an additional 35 patients completed it electronically. All respondents felt the questions were clear and no additional issues needed to be addressed. Feedback was used to clarify the instructions for how to respond to the questions if bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy had been performed.

Conclusions: Through qualitative patient interviews and adaptation of existing BREAST-Q questions, appropriate nipple-focused questions were developed to assess outcomes following nipple-sparing mastectomy. Incorporating these questions into patient-reported outcomes assessment of patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy can help improve future techniques and optimize outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Schnitt SJ, Goldwyn RM, Slavin SA. Mammary ducts in the areola: Implications for patients undergoing reconstructive surgery of the breast. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993;92:1290–1293.
    1. Simmons RM, Fish SK, Gayle L, et al. Local and distant recurrence rates in skin-sparing mastectomies compared with non-skin-sparing mastectomies. Ann Surg Oncol. 1999;6:676–681.
    1. Wang F, Peled AW, Garwood E, et al. Total skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: An evolution of technique and assessment of outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:3223–3230.
    1. Manning AT, Sacchini VS. Conservative mastectomies for breast cancer and risk-reducing surgery: The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center experience. Gland Surg. 2016;5:55–62.
    1. Frey JD, Alperovich M, Kim JC, et al. Oncologic outcomes after nipple-sparing mastectomy: A single-institution experience. J Surg Oncol. 2016;113:8–11.

Publication types