Search

PURPOSE: Tumor genomic testing (TGT) has become increasingly adopted as part of standard cancer care for many cancers. Despite national guidelines around patient education before TGT, available evidence suggests that most patients' understanding of genomics remains limited, particularly lower-income and minority patients, and most patients are not informed regarding potential incidental germline findings. METHODS: To investigate and address limitations in patient understanding of TGT results, a Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) approach is being used to assess needs, identify opportunities for improvement, and implement approaches to optimize patient education. We reviewed published guidelines related to pre-TGT provider-patient education and to identify key points (Plan). A provider quality improvement survey was completed (Do), which highlighted inconsistency in pre-TGT discussion practice across providers and minimal discussion with patients regarding the possibility of incidental germline findings. RESULTS: Patient focus groups and interviews (N = 12 patients) were completed with coding of each transcript (Study), which revealed themes including trouble differentiating TGT from other forms of testing, yet understanding that results could tailor therapy. The integration of data across this initial PDSA cycle identified consistent themes and opportunities, which were incorporated into a patient-directed, concise animated video for pre-TGT education (Act), which will form the foundation of a subsequent PDSA cycle. The video addresses how TGT may/may not inform treatment, the process for TGT using existing tissue or liquid biopsy, insurance coverage, and the potential need for germline genetics follow-up because of incidental findings. CONCLUSION: This PDSA cycle reveals key gaps and opportunities for improvement in patient education before TGT.

Background Rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM)—removal of the healthy breast following breast cancer diagnosis—have increased, particularly among women for whom CPM provides no survival benefit. Affective (i.e., emotional) decision making is often blamed for this increase. We studied whether greater negative breast cancer affect could motivate uptake of CPM through increased cancer risk perceptions and biased treatment evaluations. Methods We randomly assigned healthy women with average breast-cancer risk ( N = 1,030; Mage = 44.14, SD = 9.23 y) to 1 of 3 affect conditions (negative v. neutral v. positive narrative manipulation) in a hypothetical online experiment in which they were asked to imagine being diagnosed with cancer in one breast. We assessed 1) treatment choice, 2) affect toward CPM, and 3) perceived risk of future breast cancer in each breast (cancer affected and healthy) following lumpectomy, single mastectomy, and CPM. Results The manipulation caused women in the negative and neutral narrative conditions (26.9% and 26.4%, respectively) to choose CPM more compared with the positive narrative condition (19.1%). Across conditions, women’s CPM affect did not differ. However, exploratory analyses addressing a possible association of affect toward cancer-related targets suggested that women in the negative narrative condition may have felt more positively toward CPM than women in the positive narrative condition. The manipulation did not have significant effects on breast cancer risk perceptions. Limitations The manipulation of affect had a small effect size, possibly due to the hypothetical nature of this study and/or strong a priori knowledge and attitudes about breast cancer and its treatment options. Conclusion Increased negative affect toward breast cancer increased choice of CPM over other surgical options and might have motivated more positive affective evaluations of CPM. Highlights This study used narratives to elicit different levels of negative integral affect toward breast cancer to investigate the effects of affect on breast cancer treatment choices. Increased negative affect toward breast cancer increased the choice of double mastectomy over lumpectomy and single mastectomy to treat a hypothetical, early-stage cancer. The narrative manipulation of negative affect toward breast cancer did not change the perceived risks of future cancer following any of the surgical interventions. Negative affect toward breast cancer may have biased affective evaluations of double mastectomy.

Abstract Measuring quality of life (QOL) after cranioplasty is increasingly evident as a necessary component of patient-centered care. For data to be useful in clinical decision-making and approval of new therapies, studies must utilize valid and reliable instruments. Our objective was to critically appraise studies evaluating QOL in adult cranioplasty patients and determine validity and relevance of the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used. Electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and PsychINFO were used to identify PROMs measuring QOL in adult patients with cranioplasty. The methodological approach, cranioplasty outcomes, and domains measured by the PROMs were extracted and summarized descriptively. A content analysis of the identified PROMs was completed to identify the concepts measured. From 2236 articles identified, 17 articles containing eight QOL PROMs met the inclusion criteria. None of the PROMs was specifically validated or developed for adults undergoing cranioplasty. The QOL domains included physical health, psychological health, social health, and general QOL. These four domains encompassed 216 total items among the PROMs. Appearance was only assessed in two PROMs. To our knowledge, there are currently no validated PROMs that comprehensively measure appearance, facial function, and adverse effects in adults undergoing cranioplasty. There is an urgent need to develop PROMs to measure QOL outcomes rigorously and comprehensively in this patient population to inform clinical care, research, and quality improvement initiatives. Findings from this systematic review will be used to derive an outcome instrument containing important concepts related to QOL in patients who undergo cranioplasty.

Breast reconstruction is associated with improved patient well-being after mastectomy; however, factors that contribute to post-surgical dissatisfaction remain poorly characterized. Adult women who underwent post-mastectomy implant-based or autologous breast reconstruction between 2015 and 2019 were recruited to participate in semi-structured interviews regarding their lived experiences with reconstructive care. Participants completed the BREAST-Q, and tabulated scores were used to dichotomize patient-reported outcomes as satisfied or dissatisfied (high or low) for each BREAST-Q domain. A convergent mixed-methods analysis was used to evaluate interviews for content related to satisfaction or dissatisfaction with breast reconstruction. Overall, we interviewed 21 women and identified 17 subcodes that corresponded with the five BREAST-Q domains. Sources of dissatisfaction were found to be related to the following domains: (a) low breast satisfaction due to asymmetry, cup size, and lack of sensation and physical feeling (n = 8, 38%); (b) poor sexual well-being due to shape, look and feel (n = 7, 78% [of 9 who discussed sexual well-being]); (c) reduced physical well-being of the chest due to persistent pain and weakness (n = 11, 52%); (d) reduced abdominal well-being due to changes in abdominal strength, numbness, and posture (n = 6, 38% [of 16 who underwent abdominally based reconstruction]); and (e) low psychosocial well-being impacted by an unexpected appearance that negatively influenced self-confidence and self-identity (n = 13, 62%). Patients may be unprepared for the physical, sexual, and psychosocial outcomes of breast reconstruction. Targeted strategies to improve preoperative education and shared decision making are needed to mitigate unexpectedness associated with breast reconstruction and related outcomes.

This study was designed to: (1) characterize longitudinal patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between breast cancer patients undergoing lumpectomy and mastectomy and (2) compare return to baseline scores at 3 months and 6 months postoperatively. Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients seen at an academic breast center between June 2019 and February 2021 were invited to participate in longitudinal PRO surveys at their initial clinic visit. If willing to participate, patients were emailed the validated BREAST-Q™ questionnaire at the initial clinic visit (baseline), 2 weeks after surgery, and then every 3 months for the first year. We used linear mixed models to estimate the differences in slopes over time between lumpectomy and mastectomy for each PRO measure. Pearson’s Chi-square tests with Yates’ continuity correction were used to compare proportions of patients who return to baseline PRO scores. P < 0.05 was considered significant. Of 164 patients invited to participate, 100 (61%) completed a baseline survey and were included in analyses. Mastectomy patients had significantly greater decreases in breast satisfaction (P = 0.002), psychosocial well-being (P < 0.0001), and sexual well-being (P < 0.0001) over time compared with lumpectomy patients. Both surgical groups reported a decrease in physical well-being, although the decline was more significant in lumpectomy patients (P = 0.005). At 3 months and 6 months after surgery, significantly larger proportions of lumpectomy patients returned to their baseline breast satisfaction, psychosocial well-being, and physical well-being compared with mastectomy patients. Understanding how outcomes important to patients change over the care continuum can provide opportunities for early intervention and may prevent debilitating long-term morbidities of treatment.

Patients with non-familial, unilateral breast cancer have a low risk of contralateral breast cancer. Thus, clinical studies have shown no survival benefit for patients who undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) compared to those undergoing unilateral surgeries for non-familial unilateral breast cancers. Despite this evidence, there has been a steady increase in rates of CPM in the U.S. Patient factors influencing this choice have been identified in previous studies, but seldom in a prospective manner. This prospective study was designed to assess emotion and any association with a patient's decision to ultimately undergo CPM.We recruited patients with newly diagnosed, unilateral, non-metastatic breast cancer, who had not yet had surgery, to participate in a prospective, longitudinal study to examine the impact of emotions on CPM decision-making.Among the 86 final participants, all completed the pre-visit survey (100%) and 52 patients completed the post-visit survey (60%). Patients undergoing CPM were significantly younger than those who did not. There was no statistically significant association between emotion and receipt of CPM. There was a trend towards undergoing CPM in patients with a less open personality type and those with more negative emotion, though not statistically significant.This study found a trend toward increased CPM receipt in those with less open personality types and more negative emotion, especially post-consultation, but none of these findings was significant. Future work should include development of cancer-specific emotion scales and larger studies of possible connections between emotion, personality type and surgical decision-making for breast cancer patients.

At the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many cancer surgeries were delayed due to the unique challenges around allocating and conserving resources to treat patients with COVID-19 and reduce risk of infection for clinicians and communities. Thus there is an urgent need to develop support solutions to ensure that more time-sensitive surgeries can be prioritized, planned, and scheduled in an appropriate, safe, and patient-centered manner during pandemic recovery, across pandemic waves, and for future public health crises. Using SEIPS 2.0 as a framework, we provide an analysis of this problem space to characterize the known factors and processes. We also highlight the importance of the patient perspective.

Rising out-of-pocket costs (OOCs) are a major concern for breast cancer survivors. However, information on how plastic surgeons performing breast reconstruction (BR) perceive and communicate cost information is limited. An electronic, anonymous survey eliciting plastic surgeons’ attitudes and behaviors regarding BR cost communication was distributed to active American Society of Plastic Surgery members. Questions were derived from previously published studies and entailed a 5-point Likert scale. Cost communication was identified based on dichotomized responses to the prompt, “I discuss the costs of breast reconstruction with my patients,” and analyzed for associated factors. Of the 5112 surgeons surveyed, 396 plastic surgeons responded (7.21%). Most of the surgeons reported having a sense of a patient’s financial well-being (65%) and an awareness of treatment costs (66.9%). Most felt a responsibility to consider the impact of BR costs (69%). Although most of the surgeons expressed that they were comfortable having OOC discussions (58.9%), only a minority reported doing so routinely (24.2%). The fewest respondents (8.6%) cited OOC as an important variable for BR decision-making. Lack of supportive tools was the most cited barrier to having cost communication with patients (64.8%). Cost communication was identified in a minority (20.2%) of surgeon–patient encounters and had no significant relationship to surgeon demographics or practice setting. Plastic surgeons rarely discuss costs of BR with patients despite having a high awareness of the topic and feeling comfortable with it. Prevailing attitudes about the importance of OOC and the lack of administrative support or cost information are likely the drivers of this mismatch and warrant further study.

Background: Little is known regarding the effect of somatic tumor genomic testing on patient perceptions and psychological well-being. We previously demonstrated that patient perceptions of care can be negatively affected if their next cancer treatment is not supported by the genomic test. To further understand this, we investigated psychological effects of genomic testing, as well as sociodemographic and genomic comprehension factors that may attenuate these effects. Methods: In a prospective, single institution, single-arm trial, patients with metastatic breast cancer underwent next-generation sequencing (NGS) using Foundation Medicine at study entry, with sequencing results released to providers at time of next disease progression. We evaluated patient survey data before and after NGS, including questions about psychosocial characteristics, genetic comprehension, and perceived risks and expectations of the genomic testing. We evaluated psychosocial characteristics using 4 validated psychology measures: the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), the Trust in Physician Scale (TPS), and the Communication and Attitudinal Self-Efficacy scale for Cancer (CASE-cancer). CASE-cancer measures self-efficacy, how confident patients are in their ability to navigate their cancer care. Genetic comprehension was assessed with a 7-question objective measure and a 6-question subjective measure. No formal genetic education was provided, but the informed consent process included an introduction to NGS. We included exploratory questions on perceived risks and expectations of NGS. Results: Among the 58 patients who completed the pre-NGS survey, we found high rates of depression (38%) and anxiety (47%) using validated metrics. Depression and anxiety were positively correlated (Pearson’s r=0.61; p Citation Format: Elizabeth J Adams, Sarah Asad, Mahmoud Abdel-Rasoul, Raquel E Reinbolt, Robert Wesolowski, Kaitlyn Tolliver, Susan Gillespie, Katherine A Collier, Anne Noonan, Sargar Sardesai, Jeffrey VanDeusen, Nicole Williams, Charles L Shapiro, Erin R Macre, Bhuvaneswari Ramaswamy, Clara N Lee, Maryam B Lustberg, Daniel G Stover. Perceptions of somatic genomic testing in patients with metastatic breast cancer: Psychosocial factors, emotional well-being, and genetic comprehension [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-10-03.

A greater proportion of patients with surgical risk factors are undergoing immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy, resulting in the need for better risk prediction to inform decisions about the procedure. The objective of this study was to leverage clinical data to restructure a previously developed risk model to predict serious infectious and noninfectious wound complications after mastectomy alone and mastectomy plus immediate reconstruction for use during a surgical consultation.The study established a cohort of women age 21 years or older treated with mastectomy from 1 July 2010 to 31 December 2015 using electronic health records from two hospitals. Serious infectious and non-infectious wound complications, defined as surgical-site infection, dehiscence, tissue necrosis, fat necrosis requiring hospitalization, or surgical treatment, were identified within 180 days after surgery. Risk factors for serious wound complications were determined using modified Poisson regression, with discrimination and calibration measures. Bootstrap validation was performed to correct for overfitting.Among 2159 mastectomy procedures, 1410 (65.3%) included immediate implant or flap reconstruction. Serious wound complications were identified after 237 (16.8%) mastectomy-plus-reconstruction and 30 (4.0%) mastectomy-only procedures. Independent risk factors for serious wound complications included immediate reconstruction, bilateral mastectomy, higher body mass index, depression, and smoking. The optimism-corrected C statistic of the risk prediction model was 0.735.Immediate reconstruction, bilateral mastectomy, obesity, depression, and smoking were significant risk factors for serious wound complications in this population of women undergoing mastectomy. Our risk prediction model can be used to counsel women before surgery concerning their individual risk of serious wound complications after mastectomy.

Objective. To explore barriers and facilitators to implementing an evidence-based clinical decision support (CDS) tool (BREASTChoice) about post-mastectomy breast reconstruction into routine care. Materials and Methods. A stakeholder advisory group of cancer survivors, clinicians who discuss and/or perform breast reconstruction in women with cancer, and informatics professionals helped design and review the interview guide. Based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we conducted qualitative semistructured interviews with key stakeholders (patients, clinicians, informatics professionals) to explore intervention, setting characteristics, and process-level variables that can impact implementation. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed based on the CFIR framework using both inductive and deductive methods. Results. Fifty-seven potential participants were contacted; 49 (85.9%) were eligible, and 35 (71.4%) were enrolled, continuing until thematic saturation was reached. Participants consisted of 13 patients, 13 clinicians, and 9 informatics professionals. Stakeholders thought that BREASTChoice was useful and provided patients with an evidence-based source of information about post-mastectomy breast reconstruction, including their personalized risks. They felt that BREASTChoice could support shared decision making, improve workflow, and possibly save consultation time, but were uncertain about the best time to deliver BREASTChoice to patients. Some worried about cost, data availability, and security of integrating the tool into an electronic health record. Most acknowledged the importance of showing clinical utility to gain institutional buy-in and encourage routine adoption. Discussion and Conclusion. Stakeholders felt that BREASTChoice could support shared decision making, improve workflow, and reduce consultation time. Addressing key questions such as cost, data integration, and timing of delivering BREASTChoice could build institutional buy-in for CDS implementation. Results can guide future CDS implementation studies.

Advances in mobile app technologies offer opportunities for researchers to feasibly collect a large amount of patient data that were previously inaccessible through traditional clinical research methods. Collection of data via mobile devices allows for several advantages, such as the ability to continuously gather data outside of research facilities and produce a greater quantity of data, making these data much more valuable to researchers. Health services research is increasingly incorporating mobile health (mHealth), but collecting these data in current research institutions is not without its challenges. Our paper uses a specific example to depict specific challenges of mHealth research and provides recommendations for investigators looking to incorporate digital app technologies and patient-collected digital data into their studies. Our experience describes how clinical researchers should be prepared to work with variable software and mobile app development timelines; research institutions that are interested in participating in mHealth research need to invest in supporting information technology infrastructures in order to be a part of the growing field of mHealth and gain access to valuable patient-collected data.

UNSTRUCTURED Advances in mobile app technologies offer opportunities for researchers to feasibly collect a large amount of patient data that were previously inaccessible through traditional clinical research methods. Collection of data via mobile devices allows for several advantages, such as the ability to continuously gather data outside of research facilities and produce a greater quantity of data, making these data much more valuable to researchers. Health services research is increasingly incorporating mobile health (mHealth), but collecting these data in current research institutions is not without its challenges. Our paper uses a specific example to depict specific challenges of mHealth research and provides recommendations for investigators looking to incorporate digital app technologies and patient-collected digital data into their studies. Our experience describes how clinical researchers should be prepared to work with variable software and mobile app development timelines; research institutions that are interested in participating in mHealth research need to invest in supporting information technology infrastructures in order to be a part of the growing field of mHealth and gain access to valuable patient-collected data.

To assess the impact of internal mammary (IM) vessels radiation dose on autologous free-flap based breast reconstruction outcomes. We retrospectively evaluated the medical records of breast cancer patients who underwent mastectomy and free-flap breast reconstruction after postoperative radiation therapy (RT) to the breast/chest wall with (n = 9) or without (n = 11) electively including the IM lymph nodes. Twenty patients were included. Median age at diagnosis was 50 years (range, 33-63). The median time interval between the start of RT and reconstructive surgery was 16 months (range, 6-45). The maximal IM vessels dose was not associated with the risk of all complications (P = 0.44) or fat necrosis (P = 0.31). The mean IM vessels dose was not significant for the risk of all complications (P = 0.13) but was significant for fat necrosis (P = 0.04). A high mean IM vessels dose was related to the occurrence of fat necrosis.

BACKGROUND Safety-net hospitals serve vulnerable populations; however, care delivery may be of lower quality. Microvascular immediate breast reconstruction, relative to other breast reconstruction subtypes, is sensitive to the performance of safety-net hospitals and an important quality marker. The authors' aim was to assess the quality of care associated with safety-net hospital setting. METHODS The 2012 to 2014 National Inpatient Sample was used to identify patients who underwent microvascular immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy. Primary outcomes of interest were rates of medical complications, surgical inpatient complications, and prolonged length of stay. A doubly-robust approach (i.e., propensity score and multivariate regression) was used to analyze the impact of patient and hospital-level characteristics on outcomes. RESULTS A total of 858 patients constituted our analytic cohort following propensity matching. There were no significant differences in the odds of surgical and medical inpatient complications among safety-net hospital patients relative to their matched counterparts. Black (OR, 2.95; p < 0.001) and uninsured patients (OR, 2.623; p = 0.032) had higher odds of surgical inpatient complications. Safety-net hospitals (OR, 1.745; p = 0.005), large bedsize hospitals (OR, 2.170; p = 0.023), and Medicaid patients (OR, 1.973; p = 0.008) had higher odds of prolonged length of stay. CONCLUSIONS Safety-net hospitals had comparable odds of adverse clinical outcomes but higher odds of prolonged length of stay, relative to non-safety-net hospitals. Institution-level deficiencies in staffing and clinical processes of care might underpin the latter. Ongoing financial support of these institutions will ensure delivery of needed breast cancer care to economically disadvantaged patients. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic, III.

Breast reconstruction is associated with improved patient well-being after mastectomy; however, factors that contribute to post-surgical dissatisfaction remain poorly characterized.Adult women who underwent post-mastectomy implant-based or autologous breast reconstruction between 2015 and 2019 were recruited to participate in semi-structured interviews regarding their lived experiences with reconstructive care. Participants completed the BREAST-Q, and tabulated scores were used to dichotomize patient-reported outcomes as satisfied or dissatisfied (high or low) for each BREAST-Q domain. A convergent mixed-methods analysis was used to evaluate interviews for content related to satisfaction or dissatisfaction with breast reconstruction.Overall, we interviewed 21 women and identified 17 subcodes that corresponded with the five BREAST-Q domains. Sources of dissatisfaction were found to be related to the following domains: (a) low breast satisfaction due to asymmetry, cup size, and lack of sensation and physical feeling (n = 8, 38%); (b) poor sexual well-being due to shape, look and feel (n = 7, 78% [of 9 who discussed sexual well-being]); (c) reduced physical well-being of the chest due to persistent pain and weakness (n = 11, 52%); (d) reduced abdominal well-being due to changes in abdominal strength, numbness, and posture (n = 6, 38% [of 16 who underwent abdominally based reconstruction]); and (e) low psychosocial well-being impacted by an unexpected appearance that negatively influenced self-confidence and self-identity (n = 13, 62%).Patients may be unprepared for the physical, sexual, and psychosocial outcomes of breast reconstruction. Targeted strategies to improve preoperative education and shared decision making are needed to mitigate unexpectedness associated with breast reconstruction and related outcomes.

Background Despite increasing numbers of women with unilateral breast cancer undergoing CPM, quantitative evidence of all stakeholder preferences regarding CPM is lacking, particularly for healthy volunteers. Conjoint analysis, a marketing tool, can be used to quantify tradeoffs surrounding CPM. Study design The objective of this study was to quantify preferences for aspects of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) decision-making process among key stakeholders. Healthy volunteers, women with cancer (WwCa), surgical oncologists, and plastic surgeons were surveyed with the same conjoint simulation exercise. Respondents chose between either single (SM) or double (DM) mastectomy under varying recurrence and complication rates, surveillance, and symmetry conditions. Hierarchical Bayesian models calculated partworth utilities and importance scores. Results Overall, 1,244 respondents participated. The top 3 important factors for all stakeholders were surgical complication rates after DM, type of surgery (SM vs DM) independent of other variables, and 10-year future contralateral cancer risk after SM. HV and surgeons placed greatest importance on high rates of surgical complications after DM. WwCa preferred DM, regardless of complication risk or low rates of a 10-year future cancer episode after SM. Surgical oncologists strongly preferred SM and were more accepting of future cancer risk of 3% or 10% than other stakeholders. Symmetry and need for surveillance were least important factors for all stakeholders. Conclusions The threshold of acceptability for future cancer episodes and risk tolerance for complications varies by stakeholder, with a profound influence upon WwCA. Current findings suggest room for improved provider and patient alignment through behavioral techniques, such as framing, meanwhile highlighting changes in risk perception after a breast cancer diagnosis.

This cross-sectional study evaluates the extent of progress in female representation among program directors, chairs, and deans to provide a benchmark by which to evaluate future progress.

Many are interested in how to safely ramp up elective surgeries after national, state, and voluntary shutdowns of operating rooms to minimize the spread of COVID-19 infections to patients and providers. We conducted an analysis of diverse perspectives from stakeholders regarding how to trade off risks and benefits to patients, healthcare providers, and the local community. Our findings indicate that there are a large number of different categories of stakeholders impacted by the post-pandemic decisions to reschedule delayed treatments and surgeries. For a delayed surgery, the primary stakeholders are the surgeon with expertise about the clinical benefits of undergoing an operation and the patient’s willingness to tolerate uncertainty and the increased risk of infection. For decisions about how much capacity in the operating rooms and in the inpatient setting after the surgery, the primary considerations are minimizing staff infections, preventing patients from getting COVID-19 during operations and during post-surgical recovery at the hospital, conserving critical resources such as PPE, and meeting the needs of hospital staff for quality of life, such as child care needs and avoiding infecting members of their household. The timing and selection of elective surgery cases has an impact on the ability of hospitals to steward finances, which in turns affects decisions about maintaining employment of staff when operating rooms and inpatient rooms are not being used.

Background:. Breast reconstruction has a well-documented positive impact on the psychosocial well-being of women recovering from breast cancer. Rates of breast cancer diagnoses are rising, and more women are seeking mastectomy as treatment and as prophylaxis. Methods:. Postmastectomy breast reconstruction often begins at the time of mastectomy in coordination with the oncologic breast surgeons. Immediate breast reconstruction increases complication rate (11% vs 4%) and unplanned reoperation rate (7% vs 4%), requiring more personnel and resources used during the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases of patient care. Discussion:. In the setting of global pandemics such as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), breast reconstruction demands a unique and nuanced approach, as most forms of breast reconstruction can occur successfully in a delayed fashion. While this may prolong the overall time until completion of reconstruction, other factors come into play in the setting of a communicable (potentially deadly) illness. Factors that must be considered include allocation of essential resources and protection of patients and families from disease transmission. Conclusions:. Plastic surgeons performing breast reconstruction must take these factors into account when counseling their patients, colleagues, and institutions and be proactive in determining which procedures are time-critical and which should be postponed until the disaster situation has relieved.

BackgroundTo assess metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patient psychological factors, perceptions, and comprehension of tumor genomic testing.MethodsIn a prospective, single institution, single-arm trial, patients with MBC underwent next-generation sequencing at study entry with sequencing results released at progression. Patients who completed surveys before undergoing sequencing were included in the present secondary analysis (n = 58). We administered four validated psychosocial measures: Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Trust in Physician Scale, and Communication and Attitudinal Self-Efficacy scale for Cancer. Genetic comprehension was assessed using 7-question objective and 6-question subjective measures. Longitudinal data were assessed (n = 40) using paired Wilcoxon signed rank and McNemar’s test of agreement.ResultsThere were no significant differences between the beginning and end of study in depression, anxiety, physician trust, or self-efficacy (median time on study: 7.6 months). Depression and anxiety were positively associated with each other and both negatively associated with self-efficacy. Self-efficacy decreased from pre- to post-genomic testing (p = 0.05). Objective genetics comprehension did not significantly change from pre- to post-genomic testing, but patients expressed increased confidence in their ability to teach others about genetics (p = 0.04). Objective comprehension was significantly lower in non-white patients (p = 0.02) and patients with lower income (p = 0.04).ConclusionsThis is the only study, to our knowledge, to longitudinally evaluate multiple psychological metrics in MBC as patients undergo tumor genomic testing. Overall, psychological dimensions remained stable over the duration of tumor genomic testing. Among patients with MBC, depression and anxiety metrics were negatively correlated with patient self-efficacy. Patients undergoing somatic genomic testing had limited genomic knowledge, which varied by demographic groups and may warrant additional educational intervention.Clinical trial informationNCT01987726, registered November 13, 2013.

Rising out-of-pocket costs (OOCs) are a major concern for breast cancer survivors. However, information on how plastic surgeons performing breast reconstruction (BR) perceive and communicate cost information is limited.An electronic, anonymous survey eliciting plastic surgeons' attitudes and behaviors regarding BR cost communication was distributed to active American Society of Plastic Surgery members. Questions were derived from previously published studies and entailed a 5-point Likert scale. Cost communication was identified based on dichotomized responses to the prompt, "I discuss the costs of breast reconstruction with my patients," and analyzed for associated factors.Of the 5112 surgeons surveyed, 396 plastic surgeons responded (7.21%). Most of the surgeons reported having a sense of a patient's financial well-being (65%) and an awareness of treatment costs (66.9%). Most felt a responsibility to consider the impact of BR costs (69%). Although most of the surgeons expressed that they were comfortable having OOC discussions (58.9%), only a minority reported doing so routinely (24.2%). The fewest respondents (8.6%) cited OOC as an important variable for BR decision-making. Lack of supportive tools was the most cited barrier to having cost communication with patients (64.8%). Cost communication was identified in a minority (20.2%) of surgeon-patient encounters and had no significant relationship to surgeon demographics or practice setting.Plastic surgeons rarely discuss costs of BR with patients despite having a high awareness of the topic and feeling comfortable with it. Prevailing attitudes about the importance of OOC and the lack of administrative support or cost information are likely the drivers of this mismatch and warrant further study.

PurposeTo assess metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patient perceptions and comprehension of tumor genomic testing and to evaluate associations with psychological wellbeing.MethodsIn a prospective, single institution, single-arm trial, patients with MBC underwent next-generation sequencing at study entry, with sequencing results released at progression. Patients who completed surveys before undergoing sequencing were included in the study (n=58). We administered four validated psychosocial measures: Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Trust in Physician Scale, and Communication and Attitudinal Self-Efficacy scale for Cancer. Genetic comprehension was assessed using 7-question objective and 6-question subjective measures. Longitudinal data were assessed using paired Wilcoxon signed rank and McNemar’s test of agreement.ResultsThere were no significant differences between the beginning and end of study in depression, anxiety, physician trust, or self-efficacy (median time on study: 7.6 months). Depression and anxiety were positively associated with each other and both negatively associated with self-efficacy. Self-efficacy decreased from pre-to post-genomic testing (p=0.05). There was a wide range of objective genetics comprehension and comprehension was significantly lower in non-white patients (p=0.02) and patients with lower income (p=0.04). Patients expressed increased confidence in their ability to teach others about genetics at end of study.ConclusionsThis is the only study, to our knowledge, to longitudinally evaluate multiple psychological metrics in MBC as patients undergo tumor genomic testing. Among patients with MBC, depression and anxiety metrics were negatively correlated with patient self-efficacy. Patients undergoing somatic genomic testing had limited genomic knowledge, which varied by demographic groups.

Key Clinical Message The oncologic safety of fat grafting procedures remains well‐characterized in the recent literature; however, we recommend exercising vigilance when evaluating BRCA‐positive and other patients at higher oncologic risk after reconstruction and fat grafting, whose cancer recurrence diagnosis may pose significant clinical challenges.

Background: A new illness could first come to the public attention over social media before it is medically defined, formally documented or systematically studied. One example is a phenomenon known as breast implant illness (BII) that has been extensively discussed on social media, though vaguely defined in medical literature. Objectives: The objective of this study is to construct a data analysis pipeline to understand emerging illness using social media data, and to apply the pipeline to understand key attributes of BII. Methods: We conducted a pipeline of social media data analysis using Natural Language Processing (NLP) and topic modeling. We extracted mentions related to signs/symptoms, diseases/disorders and medical procedures using the Clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System (cTAKES) from social media data. We mapped the mentions to standard medical concepts. We summarized mapped concepts to topics using Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA). Finally, we applied this pipeline to understand BII from several BII-dedicated social media sites. Results: Our pipeline identified topics related to toxicity, cancer and mental health issues that are highly associated with BII. Our pipeline also shows that cancers, autoimmune disorders and mental health problems are emerging concerns associated with breast implants based on social media discussions. The pipeline also identified mentions such as rupture, infection, pain and fatigue as common self-reported issues among the public, as well as toxicity from silicone implants. Conclusions: Our study could inspire future work studying the suggested symptoms and factors of BII. Our study provides the first analysis and derived knowledge of BII from social media using NLP techniques, and demonstrates the potential of using social media information to better understand similar emerging illnesses., The manuscript has been accepted at the JMIR Medical Informatics

Introduction A lower extremity injury can be a devastating event in low-income countries due to limited access to surgical care. Its incidence, treatment patterns, and outcomes, however, have not been well-described. Methods We prospectively enrolled all patients admitted with lower extremity trauma to a tertiary hospital in Lilongwe, Malawi between October 2010 and September 2011. Patients with a lower extremity injury but primarily admitted for unrelated reasons were excluded. The outcomes were deaths, complications, and length of hospital stay. Results Of the 905 patients eligible for analysis, 696 (77%) were males. Most patients had femur fractures (46%), and most were treated non-operatively (70%). Overall mortality rate was 3.9%. For adult patients with femur fractures, mortality was higher in patients treated with traction (9.0%) than for those treated with surgery (1.3%). The total complication rate was 15%, with adjusted odds of developing a complication higher in patients with concurrent head injury (OR = 2.8; 95% CI: 1.3–6.0), and patients who had an operative treatment (OR = 2; 95% CI: 1.2–1.9). The median length of stay was 16 days (IQR: 6–27) and was greatest among patients with femur fractures. Conclusion Lower extremity injuries resulted in substantial mortality and morbidity in this low-income country. Mortality was particularly high among patients with femur fractures who did not have surgery. Modern orthopedic trauma surgery is greatly needed in low-income countries.