患者对射频识别(RFID)标签定位的满意度与不可触及乳房病变的导线定位的比较:RFID试验。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY BMC Cancer Pub Date : 2025-01-22 DOI:10.1186/s12885-025-13453-0
Raphaël Pete, Céleste Pinard, Fanny Sirodot, Ioana Molnar, Margot Dressaire, Angeline Ginzac, Catherine Abrial, Xavier Durando, Marielle Tekath
{"title":"患者对射频识别(RFID)标签定位的满意度与不可触及乳房病变的导线定位的比较:RFID试验。","authors":"Raphaël Pete, Céleste Pinard, Fanny Sirodot, Ioana Molnar, Margot Dressaire, Angeline Ginzac, Catherine Abrial, Xavier Durando, Marielle Tekath","doi":"10.1186/s12885-025-13453-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Most breast cancers are detected at an early stage in which case conservative surgery is indicated. An accurate preoperative localization technique is essential for conservative surgery of non-palpable breast lesions. Currently, the gold standard technique is wire localization (WL). However, this technique has well-known drawbacks. Several wire-free techniques have been developed to overcome these drawbacks; one technique is localisation by Radiofrequency Identification (RFID). The purpose of this clinical trial was to assess the superiority of RFID tags (HOLOGIC) in terms of patient satisfaction, over wire localization of non-palpable breast lesions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a single-centre, prospective, controlled and non-interventional trial. Patients were followed from their inclusion at the time of the preoperative consultation to the postoperative consultation, one month after surgery. Data on anxiety and satisfaction was collected from patients and clinicians using questionnaires, and clinical data was collected from the medical files. The primary outcome was the patients' satisfaction scores, assessed using a visual analogue scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty patients were sequentially enrolled in two groups: the wire group (n = 40) and the RFID group (n = 40). One patient from the RFID group was excluded from the analysis because of a substantial migration during deployment. On a 10-point Visual Analogue Scale, the patients' median satisfaction score was 9.8 (IQR = 1.32) for the wire group and 10 (IQR = 0.07) for the RFID group (p < 0.001). A reduction in pain between device insertion and surgery was observed in the RFID group (p = 0.009). The median placement time was shorter in the RFID group (15 min, IQR = 6) than in the wire group (20 min, IQR = 30) (p = 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results show a statistically significant difference in median patient satisfaction score with the localization of non-palpable breast cancer lesions using RFID tags compared to the use of the WL. Although our results did not show clinically significant outcomes in terms of satisfaction, RFID tags are a reliable alternative to WL and simplify the organization of patients' healthcare trajectories.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov ID; NCT04750889 registered on February 11, 2021. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04750889?term=rfid&draw=2&rank=1.</p>","PeriodicalId":9131,"journal":{"name":"BMC Cancer","volume":"25 1","pages":"123"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11753160/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient satisfaction with radio-frequency identification (RFID) tag localization compared with wire localization for nonpalpable breast lesions: the RFID trial.\",\"authors\":\"Raphaël Pete, Céleste Pinard, Fanny Sirodot, Ioana Molnar, Margot Dressaire, Angeline Ginzac, Catherine Abrial, Xavier Durando, Marielle Tekath\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12885-025-13453-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Most breast cancers are detected at an early stage in which case conservative surgery is indicated. An accurate preoperative localization technique is essential for conservative surgery of non-palpable breast lesions. Currently, the gold standard technique is wire localization (WL). However, this technique has well-known drawbacks. Several wire-free techniques have been developed to overcome these drawbacks; one technique is localisation by Radiofrequency Identification (RFID). The purpose of this clinical trial was to assess the superiority of RFID tags (HOLOGIC) in terms of patient satisfaction, over wire localization of non-palpable breast lesions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a single-centre, prospective, controlled and non-interventional trial. Patients were followed from their inclusion at the time of the preoperative consultation to the postoperative consultation, one month after surgery. Data on anxiety and satisfaction was collected from patients and clinicians using questionnaires, and clinical data was collected from the medical files. The primary outcome was the patients' satisfaction scores, assessed using a visual analogue scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty patients were sequentially enrolled in two groups: the wire group (n = 40) and the RFID group (n = 40). One patient from the RFID group was excluded from the analysis because of a substantial migration during deployment. On a 10-point Visual Analogue Scale, the patients' median satisfaction score was 9.8 (IQR = 1.32) for the wire group and 10 (IQR = 0.07) for the RFID group (p < 0.001). A reduction in pain between device insertion and surgery was observed in the RFID group (p = 0.009). The median placement time was shorter in the RFID group (15 min, IQR = 6) than in the wire group (20 min, IQR = 30) (p = 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results show a statistically significant difference in median patient satisfaction score with the localization of non-palpable breast cancer lesions using RFID tags compared to the use of the WL. Although our results did not show clinically significant outcomes in terms of satisfaction, RFID tags are a reliable alternative to WL and simplify the organization of patients' healthcare trajectories.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov ID; NCT04750889 registered on February 11, 2021. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04750889?term=rfid&draw=2&rank=1.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9131,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Cancer\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"123\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11753160/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-025-13453-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-025-13453-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:大多数乳腺癌在早期被发现,在这种情况下需要保守手术。准确的术前定位技术是不可触及的乳房病变保守手术的必要条件。目前,金标准技术是导线定位(WL)。然而,这种技术有众所周知的缺点。为了克服这些缺点,已经开发了几种无线技术;一种技术是通过射频识别(RFID)进行定位。本临床试验的目的是评估射频识别标签(HOLOGIC)在患者满意度方面的优势,而不是在不可触及的乳房病变中进行导线定位。方法:这是一项单中心、前瞻性、对照和非干预性试验。患者从术前会诊入组一直随访到术后会诊,即术后一个月。通过问卷调查方式收集患者和临床医生的焦虑和满意度数据,并从医疗档案中收集临床数据。主要结果是患者的满意度得分,使用视觉模拟量表进行评估。结果:80例患者依次分为两组:金属丝组(n = 40)和RFID组(n = 40)。来自RFID组的一名患者被排除在分析之外,因为在部署期间有大量迁移。在10分制视觉模拟量表上,导线组患者满意度中位数为9.8分(IQR = 1.32), RFID组患者满意度中位数为10分(IQR = 0.07) (p)。结论:与使用WL相比,使用RFID标签定位不可触及的乳腺癌病变患者满意度中位数有统计学意义。虽然我们的研究结果在满意度方面没有显示出临床显著的结果,但RFID标签是WL的可靠替代方案,并简化了患者医疗保健轨迹的组织。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov ID;NCT04750889于2021年2月11日注册。https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04750889?term=rfid&draw=2&rank=1。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Patient satisfaction with radio-frequency identification (RFID) tag localization compared with wire localization for nonpalpable breast lesions: the RFID trial.

Background: Most breast cancers are detected at an early stage in which case conservative surgery is indicated. An accurate preoperative localization technique is essential for conservative surgery of non-palpable breast lesions. Currently, the gold standard technique is wire localization (WL). However, this technique has well-known drawbacks. Several wire-free techniques have been developed to overcome these drawbacks; one technique is localisation by Radiofrequency Identification (RFID). The purpose of this clinical trial was to assess the superiority of RFID tags (HOLOGIC) in terms of patient satisfaction, over wire localization of non-palpable breast lesions.

Methods: This was a single-centre, prospective, controlled and non-interventional trial. Patients were followed from their inclusion at the time of the preoperative consultation to the postoperative consultation, one month after surgery. Data on anxiety and satisfaction was collected from patients and clinicians using questionnaires, and clinical data was collected from the medical files. The primary outcome was the patients' satisfaction scores, assessed using a visual analogue scale.

Results: Eighty patients were sequentially enrolled in two groups: the wire group (n = 40) and the RFID group (n = 40). One patient from the RFID group was excluded from the analysis because of a substantial migration during deployment. On a 10-point Visual Analogue Scale, the patients' median satisfaction score was 9.8 (IQR = 1.32) for the wire group and 10 (IQR = 0.07) for the RFID group (p < 0.001). A reduction in pain between device insertion and surgery was observed in the RFID group (p = 0.009). The median placement time was shorter in the RFID group (15 min, IQR = 6) than in the wire group (20 min, IQR = 30) (p = 0.01).

Conclusion: Our results show a statistically significant difference in median patient satisfaction score with the localization of non-palpable breast cancer lesions using RFID tags compared to the use of the WL. Although our results did not show clinically significant outcomes in terms of satisfaction, RFID tags are a reliable alternative to WL and simplify the organization of patients' healthcare trajectories.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID; NCT04750889 registered on February 11, 2021. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04750889?term=rfid&draw=2&rank=1.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Cancer
BMC Cancer 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
2.60%
发文量
1204
审稿时长
6.8 months
期刊介绍: BMC Cancer is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of cancer research, including the pathophysiology, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of cancers. The journal welcomes submissions concerning molecular and cellular biology, genetics, epidemiology, and clinical trials.
期刊最新文献
Real-world outcomes of CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with endocrine therapy as first-line treatment for HR-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: multicenter evidence from China. Electronic patient-reported outcome monitoring system for sarcoma patients undergoing drug treatment: a development and feasibility study. Habitat analysis and other AI technologies for Ki-67 prediction in hepatocellular carcinoma: a multi-center study. P53 - a new player in the metabolic adaptation of colorectal carcinoma cells under hypoxia. Application of cervical combined with bilateral uterine cornual injection of tracer in sentinel lymph node mapping of early endometrial cancer.
×
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