17. Patient‐reported outcome measures: O‐BCS versus S‐BCS.
| Study: intervention details | Outcome measure | Intervention: quality of life | Intervention: cosmetic | Intervention: other | Control: quality of life | Control: cosmetic | Control: other | P value | Conclusion |
| Keleman 2019 ‐ VD | EORTC | Median (range) emotional functioning score: 91.6 (50‐100), social functioning score: 83.4 (33‐100) | Median (range): body image score: 91.6 (50‐100) | ‐ | Emotional functioning score: 83.4 (50‐100), Social functioning score: 75.0 (50‐100) | Body image score was 75.0 (33‐100) | ‐ | < 0.01/< 0.01/< 0.01 | OPS significantly better in emotional/social/body image |
| Lansu 2014 ‐ VD | EORTC QLQ C30 and BR23 and Young Boost Trial | C30 function scale: 75.9 (22.57) C30 symptom scale: 17.31 (10.2) C30 QOL: 63.45(35.77) BR23 fuction scale: 70.19(16.30) BR23 symptom scale: 20.51 (12.35) | YBT 26.94 (15.03) | ‐ | C30 function scale: 92.34 (5.89) C30 symptom scale: 14.51 (11.18) C30 QOL: 87.96(7.30) BR23 function scale: 84.17(7.3) BR23 symptom scale: 11.9 (8.32) | YBT 31.35 (23.79) | ‐ | 0.28/0.57/0.05/0.06/0.07/0.93 | BCS significantly better in C30 QOL but otherwise no SD |
| Matrai 2014 ‐ VD | Q 47‐53 of Hungarian EORTC and self‐designed cosmetic | The quality of life questions, "Did you feel any arm or shoulder pain?" (P = 0.0399), "Did you have difficulty raising or moving your arm to the side?" (P = 0.0060) and “Did you feel any pain in the affected chest area?” (P = 0.0304) showed a significant advantage in the OPS group. | 8.73 (1.023) 61.7% had 9/10 or 10/10 | ‐ | ‐ | 7.35 (1.5) ‐ 23.3% had 9/10 or 10/10 | ‐ | < 0.001 | Significantly better PR cosmetic score in OPS than control. Significantly less shoulder disability and chest pain in OPS group. |
| Acosta‐Marin 2014 ‐ VD | Self‐designed | ‐ | Mean: 4.4 ‐ 88.4% (4/5 (good) or 5/5 (excellent)) | ‐ | ‐ | Mean: 4.2 83.4% (4/5 (good) or 5/5 (excellent)) | ‐ | 0.644 | No SD |
| Jiang 2015 ‐ VD | Self‐designed | ‐ | 28 (93.3%) satisfied | ‐ | ‐ | 25 (83.3%) satisfied | ‐ | ‐ | More satisfied in OPS |
| Tang 2016 ‐ VD and VR | Self‐designed | ‐ | 62/67 satisfied | ‐ | ‐ | 92/117 satisfied | ‐ | 0.025 | Significantly more satisfied in OPS |
| Eichler 2013 ‐ VD | Self‐designed | Overall satisfaction (4‐5/5): 86% | Satisfied with overall appearance: 83% | ‐ | Overall satisfaction (4‐5/1‐5): 87% | Satisfied with overall appearance: 87% | No significant difference in overall, shape, appearance, size, quality of life, sensitivity in nipple, swelling, self‐confidence. Significant better satisfaction with appearance/amount of scar tissue in BCS compared to OPS | Overall satisfaction: 0.48 Cosmetic evaluation: 0.91 Scar satisfaction: 0.013 |
No SD in most domains. Scar satisfaction better in BCS |
| Gicalone 2007 (2) ‐ VD | Self‐designed | ‐ | 32/39 (4‐5/5) | ‐ | 63/88 (4‐5/5) | ‐ | 0.23 | No SD of cosmetic satisfaction between patient groups | |
| Hilli‐Betz 2014 ‐ VD | Self‐designed | ‐ | 92.8% ‐ very satisfied with the cosmetic appearance of their breasts. No difference in physical attractiveness | More PROMS in paper | ‐ | 83.5% ‐ very satisfied with the cosmetic. No difference in physical attractiveness | More PROMS in paper | 0.189/0.435 | No SD in PROMs in paper |
| Mazouni 2013 ‐ VD | Self‐designed | ‐ | Moderately satisfied: 12.5%; satisfied: 37.5%; very satisfied: 50% | ‐ | ‐ | Moderately satisfied: 14.5%, satisfied: 47.9%, very satisfied: 37.6% | ‐ | 0.52 | No SD in cosmetic difference |
| Palsodittlir 2018 ‐ VD and VR | Self‐designed | ‐ | 97% happy with aesthetic outcome of surgery | ‐ | ‐ | 89% happy | ‐ | ‐ | Greater proportion of patients in OPS happy with the aesthetic outcome |
| Santos 2015 ‐ VD | Self‐designed | ‐ | 35 excellent (61.4%) | ‐ | ‐ | 45 excellent (69.2%) | ‐ | 0.242 | No SD in patient‐reported cosmetic score |
| Sherwell‐Cabello 2006 ‐ VD | Self‐designed | Overall QOL 4.77 | 4.81 | ‐ | 4.81 | 4.72 | ‐ | 0.256 | No SD in any parameters. High levels of aesthetic acceptance and mild psychological and social impact on patients. |
| Tenofsky 2014 ‐ VD | Self‐designed | ‐ | 8 complained of unfavourable cosmetic outcomes (13.8%) | ‐ | ‐ | 6 (7.1%) complained of unfavourable cosmetic outcome | ‐ | 0.191 | No SD in patient‐reported complaints of cosmetic outcome |
| Viega 2011 ‐ VD | Self‐designed | ‐ | 10 (9‐10)/10 | ‐ | ‐ | 10 (5‐10)/10 | ‐ | < 0.001 | OPS is better than standard BCS |
| Zhou 2019 ‐ VR | Self‐designed and DASH | ‐ | 28 (87.5) extremely satisfied | DASH 10.57 | ‐ | 22 (78.6) extremely satisfied | DASH 7.86 | NS/0.06 | No SD in overall outcome or DASH questionnaires scores |
O‐BCS: oncoplastic breast‐conserving surgery S‐BCS: standard breast‐conserving surgery VD: volume displacement VR: volume replacement
PROM: Patient‐reported outcome measures
DASH: The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire
EORTC: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer
YBT: Young Boost Trial