Preferences for Care among African American Women Considering Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Plastic and reconstructive surgery Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-04 DOI:10.1097/PRS.0000000000012003
Ronnie L Shammas, Anna Hung, Janel Ramkalawan, Alexandria Mullikin, Angelo Moore, Rachel A Greenup, Scott T Hollenbeck, Brett T Phillips, Evan Matros, Shelby D Reed, Clara N Lee
{"title":"Preferences for Care among African American Women Considering Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction.","authors":"Ronnie L Shammas, Anna Hung, Janel Ramkalawan, Alexandria Mullikin, Angelo Moore, Rachel A Greenup, Scott T Hollenbeck, Brett T Phillips, Evan Matros, Shelby D Reed, Clara N Lee","doi":"10.1097/PRS.0000000000012003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Approximately 20% of patients report inadequate discussions with their providers about reconstructive options, with an increased frequency reported by non-White women. Eliciting treatment preferences with adaptive choice-based conjoint (ACBC) analysis can improve understanding of what patients value. The authors aimed to determine what African American patients value when considering breast reconstruction options.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cross-sectional ACBC analysis was performed for African American women considering breast reconstruction who were recruited through community partnerships and an academic medical center. Relative importance scores, part-worth utilities, and maximum-acceptable risks were calculated to assess preferences for attributes of flap versus implant reconstruction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 181 women-101 from an academic center and 80 from the community-were included. The most important attributes were risk of complications (mean ± SD relative importance [RI], 26% ± 12%), additional operations (RI, 24% ± 14%), and abdominal morbidity (RI, 22% ± 11%). Women were least concerned with appearance (RI, 15% ± 12%) and recovery time (RI, 14% ± 10%). Fewer women preferred a profile representing flap ( n = 27 [15%]) compared with implant reconstruction ( n = 154 [85%]). Those who preferred flap reconstruction cared most about additional operations (RI, 36% ± 15%); in contrast, those who preferred implant reconstruction cared most about complications (RI, 27% ± 12%). Participants with fewer comorbidities (OR, 0.84; P = 0.012), no pervious surgical complications (OR, 0.32; P = 0.029), or prophylactic mastectomy (OR, 6.07; P = 0.19) were more likely to choose the implant profile.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>African American patients place greatest value on minimizing complication risk and additional surgery when considering postmastectomy reconstruction. Future studies should assess how eliciting individual-level preferences can improve shared decision-making in surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":20128,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","volume":" ","pages":"357-366"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000012003","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Approximately 20% of patients report inadequate discussions with their providers about reconstructive options, with an increased frequency reported by non-White women. Eliciting treatment preferences with adaptive choice-based conjoint (ACBC) analysis can improve understanding of what patients value. The authors aimed to determine what African American patients value when considering breast reconstruction options.

Methods: Cross-sectional ACBC analysis was performed for African American women considering breast reconstruction who were recruited through community partnerships and an academic medical center. Relative importance scores, part-worth utilities, and maximum-acceptable risks were calculated to assess preferences for attributes of flap versus implant reconstruction.

Results: Overall, 181 women-101 from an academic center and 80 from the community-were included. The most important attributes were risk of complications (mean ± SD relative importance [RI], 26% ± 12%), additional operations (RI, 24% ± 14%), and abdominal morbidity (RI, 22% ± 11%). Women were least concerned with appearance (RI, 15% ± 12%) and recovery time (RI, 14% ± 10%). Fewer women preferred a profile representing flap ( n = 27 [15%]) compared with implant reconstruction ( n = 154 [85%]). Those who preferred flap reconstruction cared most about additional operations (RI, 36% ± 15%); in contrast, those who preferred implant reconstruction cared most about complications (RI, 27% ± 12%). Participants with fewer comorbidities (OR, 0.84; P = 0.012), no pervious surgical complications (OR, 0.32; P = 0.029), or prophylactic mastectomy (OR, 6.07; P = 0.19) were more likely to choose the implant profile.

Conclusions: African American patients place greatest value on minimizing complication risk and additional surgery when considering postmastectomy reconstruction. Future studies should assess how eliciting individual-level preferences can improve shared decision-making in surgery.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
考虑乳房切除术后乳房重建的非裔美国妇女的护理偏好。
背景:大约20%的患者报告与医生就重建方案讨论不足,非白人女性报告的频率增加。采用基于自适应选择的联合(ACBC)分析来引出治疗偏好可以提高我们对患者价值的理解。我们的目的是确定非裔美国人(AA)患者在考虑乳房重建选择时的价值。方法:通过社区伙伴关系和学术医疗中心招募考虑乳房重建的AA妇女进行横断面ACBC。计算相对重要性评分、部分价值效用和最大可接受风险,以评估皮瓣与种植体重建的属性偏好。结果:总共纳入了181名女性,其中101名来自学术中心,80名来自社区。最重要的属性是并发症风险[平均(SD)相对重要性(RI), 26%(12%)],额外手术[RI, 24%(14%)]和腹部发病率[RI, 22%(11%)]。女性最不关心的是外表[RI, 15%(12%)]和恢复时间[RI, 14%(10%)]。与植入重建(n= 154,85%)相比,更少的女性选择代表皮瓣的轮廓(n= 27,15%)。选择皮瓣重建的患者最关心的是额外的手术[RI, 36% (15%)];相比之下,选择种植体重建的患者最关心的是并发症[RI, 27%(12%)]。合并症较少的参与者[OR, 0.84;p=0.012],既往无手术并发症(OR, 0.32;p=0.029),预防性乳房切除术(OR, 6.07;P =0.19)更倾向于选择种植体外形。结论:AA患者在考虑乳房切除术后重建时,最重视减少并发症的风险和额外的手术。未来的研究应该评估如何激发个人层面的偏好来改善手术中的共同决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
13.90%
发文量
1436
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: For more than 70 years Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® has been the one consistently excellent reference for every specialist who uses plastic surgery techniques or works in conjunction with a plastic surgeon. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® , the official journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, is a benefit of Society membership, and is also available on a subscription basis. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® brings subscribers up-to-the-minute reports on the latest techniques and follow-up for all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including breast reconstruction, experimental studies, maxillofacial reconstruction, hand and microsurgery, burn repair, cosmetic surgery, as well as news on medicolegal issues. The cosmetic section provides expanded coverage on new procedures and techniques and offers more cosmetic-specific content than any other journal. All subscribers enjoy full access to the Journal''s website, which features broadcast quality videos of reconstructive and cosmetic procedures, podcasts, comprehensive article archives dating to 1946, and additional benefits offered by the newly-redesigned website.
期刊最新文献
The Impact of Race and Ethnicity on Rate of Postmastectomy Immediate Breast Reconstruction in an Integrated Healthcare Model. Reconstruction of Oncologic Trachea Defects: Classification, Algorithm, and Outcomes. Racial Disparities in Oncoplastic Reduction Mammoplasty and Mastopexy Outcomes. Incidence and Progression of Chronic Kidney Disease after Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation. Pathways to Plastic Surgery: Searching for Hidden Entrances.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1