Cargando…

The Partner Perspective on Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION: Partner involvement in the decision-making process concerning breast reconstruction (BR) after a breast cancer diagnosis may be very supportive for the patient. So far, no study evaluates partner satisfaction with the outcome after BR and the relationship to patient satisfaction. The a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: von Glinski, Maxi, Holler, Nikla, Kümmel, Sherko, Wallner, Christoph, Wagner, Johannes Maximilian, Sogorski, Alexander, Reinkemeier, Felix, Reinisch, Mattea, Lehnhardt, Marcus, Behr, Björn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10390354/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36820865
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03286-2
_version_ 1785082461400596480
author von Glinski, Maxi
Holler, Nikla
Kümmel, Sherko
Wallner, Christoph
Wagner, Johannes Maximilian
Sogorski, Alexander
Reinkemeier, Felix
Reinisch, Mattea
Lehnhardt, Marcus
Behr, Björn
author_facet von Glinski, Maxi
Holler, Nikla
Kümmel, Sherko
Wallner, Christoph
Wagner, Johannes Maximilian
Sogorski, Alexander
Reinkemeier, Felix
Reinisch, Mattea
Lehnhardt, Marcus
Behr, Björn
author_sort von Glinski, Maxi
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Partner involvement in the decision-making process concerning breast reconstruction (BR) after a breast cancer diagnosis may be very supportive for the patient. So far, no study evaluates partner satisfaction with the outcome after BR and the relationship to patient satisfaction. The aim of this study was to assess and compare partner satisfaction of BR with autologous tissue (ABR) and prosthetic implants (IBR), respectively, and compare it to patient-reported outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients undergoing ABR and IBR between January 2014 and December 2020 were asked to participate with their partners. Patient and partner satisfaction with breast reconstruction, overall outcome as well as patient’s perceived and self-reported psychosocial well-being were evaluated using the Breast-Q and a modified partner questionnaire, respectively. RESULTS: Fifty-three couples participated (IBR: n=30, ABR: n = 23). Patient and partner satisfaction with breast (r = 0.552), outcome (r = 0.465) as well as patient’s perceived and self-report psychosocial well-being (r = 0.495) were highly correlated with partners scoring significantly higher (p<0.001). In terms of partner satisfaction, both reconstructive procedures achieved satisfactory results. ABR scored higher in terms of softness of breast and how natural the breast feels to touch whereas IBR was rated superior evaluating the breast size. CONCLUSION: Both reconstructive procedures achieve satisfactory results in terms partner satisfaction whereas patient’s psychosocial well-being was highly overestimated by their partners. Hence, partner inclusion in the regular psycho-oncological support might further sensitize them of the high psychological burden of a breast cancer diagnosis and therefore stabilize patients private support system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10390354
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103903542023-08-02 The Partner Perspective on Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction von Glinski, Maxi Holler, Nikla Kümmel, Sherko Wallner, Christoph Wagner, Johannes Maximilian Sogorski, Alexander Reinkemeier, Felix Reinisch, Mattea Lehnhardt, Marcus Behr, Björn Aesthetic Plast Surg Original Article INTRODUCTION: Partner involvement in the decision-making process concerning breast reconstruction (BR) after a breast cancer diagnosis may be very supportive for the patient. So far, no study evaluates partner satisfaction with the outcome after BR and the relationship to patient satisfaction. The aim of this study was to assess and compare partner satisfaction of BR with autologous tissue (ABR) and prosthetic implants (IBR), respectively, and compare it to patient-reported outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients undergoing ABR and IBR between January 2014 and December 2020 were asked to participate with their partners. Patient and partner satisfaction with breast reconstruction, overall outcome as well as patient’s perceived and self-reported psychosocial well-being were evaluated using the Breast-Q and a modified partner questionnaire, respectively. RESULTS: Fifty-three couples participated (IBR: n=30, ABR: n = 23). Patient and partner satisfaction with breast (r = 0.552), outcome (r = 0.465) as well as patient’s perceived and self-report psychosocial well-being (r = 0.495) were highly correlated with partners scoring significantly higher (p<0.001). In terms of partner satisfaction, both reconstructive procedures achieved satisfactory results. ABR scored higher in terms of softness of breast and how natural the breast feels to touch whereas IBR was rated superior evaluating the breast size. CONCLUSION: Both reconstructive procedures achieve satisfactory results in terms partner satisfaction whereas patient’s psychosocial well-being was highly overestimated by their partners. Hence, partner inclusion in the regular psycho-oncological support might further sensitize them of the high psychological burden of a breast cancer diagnosis and therefore stabilize patients private support system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266. Springer US 2023-02-23 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10390354/ /pubmed/36820865 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03286-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
von Glinski, Maxi
Holler, Nikla
Kümmel, Sherko
Wallner, Christoph
Wagner, Johannes Maximilian
Sogorski, Alexander
Reinkemeier, Felix
Reinisch, Mattea
Lehnhardt, Marcus
Behr, Björn
The Partner Perspective on Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction
title The Partner Perspective on Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction
title_full The Partner Perspective on Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction
title_fullStr The Partner Perspective on Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction
title_full_unstemmed The Partner Perspective on Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction
title_short The Partner Perspective on Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction
title_sort partner perspective on autologous and implant-based breast reconstruction
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10390354/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36820865
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03286-2
work_keys_str_mv AT vonglinskimaxi thepartnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT hollernikla thepartnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT kummelsherko thepartnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT wallnerchristoph thepartnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT wagnerjohannesmaximilian thepartnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT sogorskialexander thepartnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT reinkemeierfelix thepartnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT reinischmattea thepartnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT lehnhardtmarcus thepartnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT behrbjorn thepartnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT vonglinskimaxi partnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT hollernikla partnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT kummelsherko partnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT wallnerchristoph partnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT wagnerjohannesmaximilian partnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT sogorskialexander partnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT reinkemeierfelix partnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT reinischmattea partnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT lehnhardtmarcus partnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction
AT behrbjorn partnerperspectiveonautologousandimplantbasedbreastreconstruction