Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2015
Quality of life among patients after bilateral prophylactic mastectomy: a systematic review of patient-reported outcomes.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Razdan Shantanu N, Patel Vishal, Jewell Sarah, McCarthy Colleen M
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (BPM) is effective in reducing the risk of breast cancer in women with a well-defined family history of breast cancer or in women with BRCA 1 or 2 mutations. Evaluating patient-reported outcomes following BPM are thus essential for evaluating success of BPM from patient's perspective. Our systematic review aimed to: (1) identify studies describing health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients following BPM with or without reconstruction; (2) assess the effect of BPM with or without reconstruction on HRQOL; and (3) identify predictors of HRQOL post-BPM.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review of literature using the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane databases were searched.
RESULTS: The initial search resulted in 1082 studies; 22 of these studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Post-BPM, patients are satisfied with the outcomes and report high psychosocial well-being and positive body image. Sexual well-being and somatosensory function are most negatively affected. Vulnerability, psychological distress and preoperative cancer distress are significant negative predictors of quality of life and body image post-BPM.
CONCLUSION: There is a paucity of high-quality data on outcomes of different HRQOL domains post-BPM. Future studies should strive to use validated and breast-specific PRO instruments for measuring HRQOL. This will facilitate shared decision-making by enabling surgeons to provide evidence-based answers to women contemplating BPM.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review of literature using the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane databases were searched.
RESULTS: The initial search resulted in 1082 studies; 22 of these studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Post-BPM, patients are satisfied with the outcomes and report high psychosocial well-being and positive body image. Sexual well-being and somatosensory function are most negatively affected. Vulnerability, psychological distress and preoperative cancer distress are significant negative predictors of quality of life and body image post-BPM.
CONCLUSION: There is a paucity of high-quality data on outcomes of different HRQOL domains post-BPM. Future studies should strive to use validated and breast-specific PRO instruments for measuring HRQOL. This will facilitate shared decision-making by enabling surgeons to provide evidence-based answers to women contemplating BPM.