Objective vs subjective assessment of breast aesthetics: a comparison of BCCT.core software with patient satisfaction
Association of Breast Surgery ePoster Library. Barber Z. 05/15/17; 166296; P072
Ms. Zoe Barber
REGULAR CONTENT
Login now to access Regular content available to all registered users.
Abstract
Rate & Comment (0)
Introduction:
Cosmesis following breast cancer treatment is an important consideration for both patients and clinicians. To objectively assess breast cosmesis, BCCT.core software was developed in 2007. It evaluates asymmetry, scar visibility and colour differences and produces a result of either poor, fair, good or excellent. It has been validated against assessment by panels comprising plastic surgeons, breast surgeons and lay-people, but not against patient satisfaction.We therefore aimed to compare patient-reported assessment to BCCT.core's objective assessment of breast cosmesis pre- and post-oncoplastic breast surgery, including flap and implant-based reconstruction, therapeutic mammoplasty and contralateral symmetrisation surgery.
Methods:
Photographs were taken pre- and post-operatively for 19 consecutive patients undergoing oncoplastic breast surgery at our Units. These photographs were inputted into the BCCT.core software to generate an objective score of cosmesis pre- and post-operatively (poor – 1, fair – 2, good – 3, excellent - 4). Patients were asked to rate their breasts pre- and post-operatively using the same scale. The results were compared using the Student's t-test. Additionally, the change in score between pre- and post-operative assessment was compared between the BCCT.core software and the patients' assessments of their own breasts.
Results:
Pre-operatively, there was no statistical difference between the BCCT.core's assessment (mean 2.60) and patient assessment (mean 2.80). Post-operatively, patients were more impressed (mean 3.40) than the software (mean 2.60), but this was not statistically significant. Only one patient felt that her breast had changed from 'excellent' to 'fair' following surgery.
Conclusions:
Patients tended to rate their post-operative breasts more highly than their pre-operative breasts but this was not statistically significant. A larger study would help to confirm or refute this.
This study demonstrates, for the first time, that objective assessment with the BCCT.core software correlates with patients' subjective assessment of their breasts both before and after oncoplastic breast surgery. Therefore, if patients are happy, so is their surgeon!
Cosmesis following breast cancer treatment is an important consideration for both patients and clinicians. To objectively assess breast cosmesis, BCCT.core software was developed in 2007. It evaluates asymmetry, scar visibility and colour differences and produces a result of either poor, fair, good or excellent. It has been validated against assessment by panels comprising plastic surgeons, breast surgeons and lay-people, but not against patient satisfaction.We therefore aimed to compare patient-reported assessment to BCCT.core's objective assessment of breast cosmesis pre- and post-oncoplastic breast surgery, including flap and implant-based reconstruction, therapeutic mammoplasty and contralateral symmetrisation surgery.
Methods:
Photographs were taken pre- and post-operatively for 19 consecutive patients undergoing oncoplastic breast surgery at our Units. These photographs were inputted into the BCCT.core software to generate an objective score of cosmesis pre- and post-operatively (poor – 1, fair – 2, good – 3, excellent - 4). Patients were asked to rate their breasts pre- and post-operatively using the same scale. The results were compared using the Student's t-test. Additionally, the change in score between pre- and post-operative assessment was compared between the BCCT.core software and the patients' assessments of their own breasts.
Results:
Pre-operatively, there was no statistical difference between the BCCT.core's assessment (mean 2.60) and patient assessment (mean 2.80). Post-operatively, patients were more impressed (mean 3.40) than the software (mean 2.60), but this was not statistically significant. Only one patient felt that her breast had changed from 'excellent' to 'fair' following surgery.
Conclusions:
Patients tended to rate their post-operative breasts more highly than their pre-operative breasts but this was not statistically significant. A larger study would help to confirm or refute this.
This study demonstrates, for the first time, that objective assessment with the BCCT.core software correlates with patients' subjective assessment of their breasts both before and after oncoplastic breast surgery. Therefore, if patients are happy, so is their surgeon!
Introduction:
Cosmesis following breast cancer treatment is an important consideration for both patients and clinicians. To objectively assess breast cosmesis, BCCT.core software was developed in 2007. It evaluates asymmetry, scar visibility and colour differences and produces a result of either poor, fair, good or excellent. It has been validated against assessment by panels comprising plastic surgeons, breast surgeons and lay-people, but not against patient satisfaction.We therefore aimed to compare patient-reported assessment to BCCT.core's objective assessment of breast cosmesis pre- and post-oncoplastic breast surgery, including flap and implant-based reconstruction, therapeutic mammoplasty and contralateral symmetrisation surgery.
Methods:
Photographs were taken pre- and post-operatively for 19 consecutive patients undergoing oncoplastic breast surgery at our Units. These photographs were inputted into the BCCT.core software to generate an objective score of cosmesis pre- and post-operatively (poor – 1, fair – 2, good – 3, excellent - 4). Patients were asked to rate their breasts pre- and post-operatively using the same scale. The results were compared using the Student's t-test. Additionally, the change in score between pre- and post-operative assessment was compared between the BCCT.core software and the patients' assessments of their own breasts.
Results:
Pre-operatively, there was no statistical difference between the BCCT.core's assessment (mean 2.60) and patient assessment (mean 2.80). Post-operatively, patients were more impressed (mean 3.40) than the software (mean 2.60), but this was not statistically significant. Only one patient felt that her breast had changed from 'excellent' to 'fair' following surgery.
Conclusions:
Patients tended to rate their post-operative breasts more highly than their pre-operative breasts but this was not statistically significant. A larger study would help to confirm or refute this.
This study demonstrates, for the first time, that objective assessment with the BCCT.core software correlates with patients' subjective assessment of their breasts both before and after oncoplastic breast surgery. Therefore, if patients are happy, so is their surgeon!
Cosmesis following breast cancer treatment is an important consideration for both patients and clinicians. To objectively assess breast cosmesis, BCCT.core software was developed in 2007. It evaluates asymmetry, scar visibility and colour differences and produces a result of either poor, fair, good or excellent. It has been validated against assessment by panels comprising plastic surgeons, breast surgeons and lay-people, but not against patient satisfaction.We therefore aimed to compare patient-reported assessment to BCCT.core's objective assessment of breast cosmesis pre- and post-oncoplastic breast surgery, including flap and implant-based reconstruction, therapeutic mammoplasty and contralateral symmetrisation surgery.
Methods:
Photographs were taken pre- and post-operatively for 19 consecutive patients undergoing oncoplastic breast surgery at our Units. These photographs were inputted into the BCCT.core software to generate an objective score of cosmesis pre- and post-operatively (poor – 1, fair – 2, good – 3, excellent - 4). Patients were asked to rate their breasts pre- and post-operatively using the same scale. The results were compared using the Student's t-test. Additionally, the change in score between pre- and post-operative assessment was compared between the BCCT.core software and the patients' assessments of their own breasts.
Results:
Pre-operatively, there was no statistical difference between the BCCT.core's assessment (mean 2.60) and patient assessment (mean 2.80). Post-operatively, patients were more impressed (mean 3.40) than the software (mean 2.60), but this was not statistically significant. Only one patient felt that her breast had changed from 'excellent' to 'fair' following surgery.
Conclusions:
Patients tended to rate their post-operative breasts more highly than their pre-operative breasts but this was not statistically significant. A larger study would help to confirm or refute this.
This study demonstrates, for the first time, that objective assessment with the BCCT.core software correlates with patients' subjective assessment of their breasts both before and after oncoplastic breast surgery. Therefore, if patients are happy, so is their surgeon!
Code of conduct/disclaimer available in General Terms & Conditions
{{ help_message }}
{{filter}}