Assessing the Quality of Breast Reconstruction Outcomes Reporting: A 5-Year Scoping Review.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Plastic and reconstructive surgery Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1097/PRS.0000000000012133
Sonali Biswas, Alexandria M Mullikin, Steven L Zeng, William M Tian, Brett T Phillips
{"title":"Assessing the Quality of Breast Reconstruction Outcomes Reporting: A 5-Year Scoping Review.","authors":"Sonali Biswas, Alexandria M Mullikin, Steven L Zeng, William M Tian, Brett T Phillips","doi":"10.1097/PRS.0000000000012133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Outcomes reporting is essential to advancing health care quality in plastic surgery and aligns closely with patient satisfaction. At present, there is no widely used set of standards for breast reconstruction reporting in the literature. This study aimed to define how breast reconstruction outcomes are characterized in the literature and identify opportunities to improve consistency across studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All articles published between 2015 and 2021 in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Annals of Plastic Surgery were screened for original articles that pertained to breast reconstruction. Included articles were evaluated using existing outcomes reporting criteria for breast reconstruction that were adapted from general surgery literature.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 833 breast reconstruction articles reviewed, 192 met inclusion criteria. Approximately one-half of the articles ( n = 87 [45.38%]) pertained to autologous breast reconstruction, 127 (66%) pertained to prosthetic breast reconstruction, and 31 (16.15%) included both procedures. Less than one-fifth of studies ( n = 53 [27.42%]) defined at least half of the complications in their study. Less than one-third included at least half of the suggested procedure-specific complications ( n = 53 [27.42%]), used severity grades ( n = 46 [24.19%]), or considered risk factors in analyses ( n = 64 [33.33%]). Infection was the most reported complication ( n = 120 [62.71%]), and 18 distinct definitions were used. Outcomes reporting criteria assessment revealed the average number of criteria met was 3.3 of a possible 10.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study found significant gaps in outcomes reporting with regard to study design, complications included, and definitions used. There was little improvement in outcomes reporting from 2015 to 2021 compared with the period from 2000 to 2014. This study supports the need for outcomes reporting standards in breast reconstruction to improve study generalizability and quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":20128,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","volume":" ","pages":"533-539"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","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.0000000000012133","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Outcomes reporting is essential to advancing health care quality in plastic surgery and aligns closely with patient satisfaction. At present, there is no widely used set of standards for breast reconstruction reporting in the literature. This study aimed to define how breast reconstruction outcomes are characterized in the literature and identify opportunities to improve consistency across studies.

Methods: All articles published between 2015 and 2021 in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Annals of Plastic Surgery were screened for original articles that pertained to breast reconstruction. Included articles were evaluated using existing outcomes reporting criteria for breast reconstruction that were adapted from general surgery literature.

Results: Of 833 breast reconstruction articles reviewed, 192 met inclusion criteria. Approximately one-half of the articles ( n = 87 [45.38%]) pertained to autologous breast reconstruction, 127 (66%) pertained to prosthetic breast reconstruction, and 31 (16.15%) included both procedures. Less than one-fifth of studies ( n = 53 [27.42%]) defined at least half of the complications in their study. Less than one-third included at least half of the suggested procedure-specific complications ( n = 53 [27.42%]), used severity grades ( n = 46 [24.19%]), or considered risk factors in analyses ( n = 64 [33.33%]). Infection was the most reported complication ( n = 120 [62.71%]), and 18 distinct definitions were used. Outcomes reporting criteria assessment revealed the average number of criteria met was 3.3 of a possible 10.

Conclusions: This study found significant gaps in outcomes reporting with regard to study design, complications included, and definitions used. There was little improvement in outcomes reporting from 2015 to 2021 compared with the period from 2000 to 2014. This study supports the need for outcomes reporting standards in breast reconstruction to improve study generalizability and quality.

“评估乳房重建结果报告的质量:五年范围回顾”。
背景:结果报告对提高整形外科医疗质量至关重要,并与患者满意度密切相关。目前,文献报道中并没有一套广泛使用的乳房重建标准。本研究旨在定义文献中乳房重建结果的特征,并确定提高研究一致性的机会。方法:筛选2015 - 2021年间发表在《Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery》和《Annals of Plastic Surgery》上的所有与乳房重建相关的原创文章。纳入的文章使用现有的结果报告标准进行评估,这些标准改编自普通外科文献。结果:833篇乳房重建文章中,192篇符合纳入标准。大约一半的文章(n = 87, 45.38%)涉及自体乳房重建,66% (n = 127)涉及假体乳房重建,16.15% (n = 31)包括两种手术。不到1/5的研究(n = 53, 27.42%)确定了其研究中至少一半的并发症。少于1/3的患者包括至少一半的建议手术特异性并发症(n = 53, 27.42%)、使用严重程度分级(n = 46, 24.19%)或在分析中考虑危险因素(n = 64, 33.33%)。感染是报告最多的并发症(n=120, 62.71%),使用了18种不同的定义。结果报告标准评估显示,达到标准的平均数量为3.3(满分为10)。结论:本研究表明,在研究设计、纳入的并发症和使用的定义方面,结果报告存在显著差异。与2000-2014年相比,2015 - 2021年的成果报告几乎没有改善。本研究支持对乳房重建结果报告标准的需求,以提高研究的普遍性和质量。
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 求助全文
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.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信