Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have gained considerable interest in health care moving beyond traditional outcome measures of morbidity and mortality. In breast cancer surgery, women's’ perceptions of appearance, function and quality of life have become increasingly important. The BREAST-Q questionnaire is a validated PROM for use in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to validate the Spanish electronic version of the BREAST-Q questionnaire, to verify the measurement equivalence of digital and paper versions and to identify the possible disadvantages and advantages of implementing this new tool.
The study population included 113 patients undergoing breast cancer survey at a single hospital in Barcelona (Spain) who were able to complete both the electronic and paper versions of the preoperative module of the BREAST-Q questionnaire.
The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) in the four domains of the questionnaire between the two versions of the questionnaire was >0.9, with a weighted kappa of >0.74 at item level. The reliability of the internal consistency was also excellent, with Cronbach's alpha coefficient of >0.70 in all domains. Age was a limiting factor for the delivery of the electronic version of BREAST-Q, with 69 years of age as the cut-off point to obtain reliable results.
The interchangeability of the electronic and paper versions of the BREAST-Q questionnaire facilitates implementation of this instrument in routine surgical oncological practice.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to European Journal of Surgical Oncology
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries.CA A Cancer J Clin. 2021; 71: 209-249https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660
- Breast cancer. 26 March 2021.(Available at)https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/breast-cancerDate accessed: January 31, 2023
- Las cifras del cáncer en España 2020.(Available at)https://seom.org/seomcms/images/stories/recursos/Cifras_del_cancer_2020.pdfDate accessed: January 31, 2023
- Impact of breast cancer and quality of life of women survivors.Rev Bras Enferm. 2018; 71: 2916-2921https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7167-2018-0081
- Quality of life among long-term breast cancer survivors: a systematic review.Eur J Cancer. 2005; 41: 2613-2619https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2005.05.017
- Satisfaction with surgery outcomes and the decision process in a population-based sample of women with breast cancer.Health Serv Res. 2005; 40: 745-767https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00383.x
- Quality of life outcomes in patients with breast cancer.Onco Rev. 2012; 6: e2https://doi.org/10.4081/oncol.2012.e2
- Patient reported outcome measures in breast cancer patients.Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018; 44: 963-968https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2018.03.009
- Patient-reported outcome measures of breast cancer surgery: evidence review and tool adaptation.Cureus. 2022; 14e27800https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.27800
- Patient-reported outcomes in breast oncology: a review of validated outcome instruments.Tumori. 2012; 98: 678-688https://doi.org/10.1177/030089161209800602
- Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: the BREAST-Q.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009; 124: 345-353https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181aee807
- PROMs in post-mastectomy care: patient self-reports (BREAST-Q™) as a powerful instrument to personalize medical services.Eur J Surg Oncol. 2020; 46: 1034-1140https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2019.11.504
- The BREAST-Q in surgical research: a review of the literature 2009-2015.J Plast Reconstr Aesthetic Surg. 2016; 69: 149-162https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2015.11.013
- Systematic review of BREAST-Q: a tool to evaluate post-mastectomy breast reconstruction.Breast Cancer. 2021; 13: 711-724https://doi.org/10.2147/BCTT.S256393
- Patient-reported outcomes assessed using the Breast-Q instrument in women undergoing breast reconstruction post-mastectomy: a systematic literature review.Value Health. 2014; 17: A649-A650https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2014.08.2359
- Autologous versus implant-based breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of Breast-Q patient-reported outcomes.J Plast Reconstr Aesthetic Surg. 2020; 73: 278-285https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2019.09.040
- Patient-reported outcomes after reduction mammoplasty using Breast-Q: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Aesthetic Surg J. 2022; (Nov 22:sjac293)https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjac293
- Spanish version of the BREAST-Q® 2.0 questionnaire --breast reduction module-: linguistic, cross-cultural adaptation and validation.Cir Esp. 2022 Oct 17; (22)00391-X: S2173-S5077https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cireng.2022.10.016
- An electronic patient-reported outcomes measurement system in paediatric orthopaedics.J Child Orthop. 2019; 13: 431-437https://doi.org/10.1302/1863-2548.13.190053
- The use of electronic PROMs provides same outcomes as paper version in a spine surgery registry. Results from a prospective cohort study.Eur Spine J. 2021; 30: 2645-2653https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-021-06834-z
- Electronic forms for patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are an effective, time-efficient, and cost-minimizing alternative to paper forms.Pediatr Rheumatol Online J. 2021; 19: 67https://doi.org/10.1186/s12969-021-00551-z
- A national snapshot of satisfaction with breast cancer procedures.Ann Surg Oncol. 2015; 22: 361-369https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4246-9
- Validation of the electronic version of the BREAST-Q in the army of women study.Breast. 2017; 33: 44-49https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2017.02.015
- Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: a meta-analytic review.Value Health. 2008; 11: 322-333https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00231.x
- A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments.J Clin Epidemiol. 2003; 56: 730-735https://doi.org/10.1016/s0895-4356(03)00084-2
- Evaluation of the preoperative perception of quality of life and satisfaction of women with breast cancer using the BREAST-Q™ questionnaire.Cir Esp. 2020; 98: 212-218https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ciresp.2019.10.004
- Breast cancer surgery after the COVID-19 pandemic.Future Oncol. 2020; 16: 2687-2690https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2020-0619
Published online: April 20, 2023
Accepted: April 19, 2023
Received in revised form: March 17, 2023
Received: November 8, 2022
Publication stageIn Press Journal Pre-Proof
© 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd.