Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32307018›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2020

Patient satisfaction and quality of life in breast reconstruction: assessment of outcomes of immediate, delayed, and nonreconstruction.

Hianga Fayssa Fernandes Siqueira, Jorge Luiz de Almeida Teixeira, Reginaldo da Silva Lessa Filho, Evânia Curvelo Hora, Filipe Ferreira Brasileiro, Kênya de Souza Borges, Érika de Abreu Costa Brito, Marcela Sampaio Lima, Adriane Dórea Marques, Alex Rodrigues Moura and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Impact of Immediate and Delayed Breast Reconstruction on Quality of Life of Breast Cancer Patients.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Breast reconstruction during the COVID-19 pandemic in resource-limited settings.GMS Interdisciplinary plastic and reconstructive surgery DGPW · 2021
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Hianga Fayssa Fernandes SiqueiraGraduate Program in Health Sciences, Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil. hfayssa@hotmail.com.
Jorge Luiz de Almeida TeixeiraBrazil University Hospital, EBSERH/Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil.
Reginaldo da Silva Lessa FilhoBrazil University Hospital, EBSERH/Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil.
Evânia Curvelo HoraGraduate Program in Health Sciences, Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil.
Filipe Ferreira BrasileiroBrazil University Hospital, EBSERH/Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil.
Kênya de Souza BorgesBrazil University Hospital, EBSERH/Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil.
Érika de Abreu Costa BritoGraduate Program in Health Sciences, Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil.
Marcela Sampaio LimaGraduate Program in Health Sciences, Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil.
Adriane Dórea MarquesGraduate Program in Health Sciences, Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil.
Alex Rodrigues MouraGraduate Program in Health Sciences, Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil.
Tarcizo Costa Figueiredo JúniorBrazil University Hospital, EBSERH/Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil.
Thiago Costa de OliveiraBrazil University Hospital, EBSERH/Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil.
Ana Alice Santana VasconcelosBrazil University Hospital, EBSERH/Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil.
Carlos Anselmo LimaGraduate Program in Health Sciences, Federal University of Sergipe, Aracaju, Brazil. ca.lima01@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study was conducted aiming to assess the quality of life and satisfaction of women who had mastectomy treated with and without breast reconstruction.

resultsA total of 81 women who had mastectomy were included, of whom 53 (65.4%) underwent breast reconstruction. Quality of life was not significantly better in the reconstruction group than the nonreconstruction group. Satisfaction with the surgically operated breast, whether reconstructed or not, was positively correlated with quality of life (p = 0.004). There was no significant difference in quality of life between women with immediate and late reconstruction. This study showed that the satisfaction of patients with the operated breast, reconstructed or not, is more important in quality of life than whether the breast was reconstructed or not. When we analyzed the quality of life of women who had mastectomy who were dissatisfied with their unreconstructed breasts, we observed that nonreconstruction had a negative impact on the quality of life.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeAdultBreast NeoplasmsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMammaplastyMastectomyMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionSurveys and QuestionnairesTime FactorsBreast cancerBreast reconstructionMastectomyQuality of life

Identifiers

PMID32307018
PMCPMC7169023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.