Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 May 19.
Published in final edited form as: Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008 Apr;121(4):186eā€“194e. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000304593.74672.b8

Table 3.

Photographic Measurements.

Reference Method or Scale Subject Population Findings
Pezner (41) Breast Retraction Assessment (BRA) Patient & clear acrylic grid and photographs 29 Normal women compared to 27 BCT patients BRA was significantly greater for breast cancer patients than for the control groups. BRA calculations correlated with the size of resection.
Van Limbergen (38, 39) BRA and panel scoring AP Photographs 142 BCT patients Significant correlations between BRA and the subjective scores were found. Increased BRA associated with poorer cosmetic outcome. p = 0.0001: X square test, Kendall Tau B and Kendall Tau C
Vrieling (40) BRA and pBRA AP Photographs 647 patients Found a significant correlation between pBRA and subjective assessment at a three-year follow-up except for those with inferomedially located tumors (Ļ = 0.24 ā€“ 0.53).
Sacchini (42) 4 measures of distances between fiducial points AP Digital images 148 BCT patients A 3-member panel, comprised of either health care professionals or patients, assessed the images. Significant difference in the aesthetic outcome among groups was reported.
Kim (44) Ratios of distances between fiducial points digitized/digital images of oblique and lateral (pre-operative) 52 BRC patients The variability in the objective measurements due to intra- and inter- observer variability in marking fiducial points was shown to be equivalent to less than one point on the subjective ptosis scale.