Exploring the Role of Partner Satisfaction in Predicting Patient Satisfaction Regarding Post-mastectomy Breast Reconstruction

Evaluating Both Partner and Patient Satisfaction With Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction

PURPOSE

Few studies have looked in-depth at the relationship between patient and partner satisfaction with postmastectomy breast reconstruction. The studies that do exist suggest that perceived partner satisfaction is an important predictor of patient satisfaction in postmastectomy breast reconstruction.

METHODS

We created a novel survey designed to look at reconstruction outcomes from a partner's perspective. Patients with a history of mastectomy-alone or mastectomy with reconstruction at our institution from January 2011 through December 2020 were contacted electronically to complete a demographic form and the BREAST-Q, while partners completed our novel partner survey. Sixteen mastectomy-only and 76 mastectomy with reconstruction couples completed surveys.

RESULTS

The mean Breast-Q and partner survey scores were 87 and 87 (maximum possible = 100), respectively, for mastectomy with reconstruction. There was a correlation of 0.57 between patient and partner overall satisfaction. There was no difference in overall satisfaction between patients who underwent reconstruction and those who did not (P = 0.19). There was a relationship between satisfaction with preoperative counseling and overall satisfaction in both patients and partners. The partner survey was found to have high internal consistency for measuring various areas of partner satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a relationship between patient and partner satisfaction with postmastectomy breast reconstruction. Our data may support the positive impact of social support on recovery after breast cancer treatment, as satisfaction was high in both groups. We therefore encourage partners to attend and participate in preoperative consultations. Finally, our novel partner survey is a reliable tool to assess partner satisfaction with postmastectomy breast reconstruction.

The Partner Perspective on Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Partner involvement in the decision-making process concerning breast reconstruction (BR) after a breast cancer diagnosis may be very supportive for the patient. So far, no study evaluates partner satisfaction with the outcome after BR and the relationship to patient satisfaction. The aim of this study was to assess and compare partner satisfaction of BR with autologous tissue (ABR) and prosthetic implants (IBR), respectively, and compare it to patient-reported outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients undergoing ABR and IBR between January 2014 and December 2020 were asked to participate with their partners. Patient and partner satisfaction with breast reconstruction, overall outcome as well as patient's perceived and self-reported psychosocial well-being were evaluated using the Breast-Q and a modified partner questionnaire, respectively.

RESULTS

Fifty-three couples participated (IBR: n=30, ABR: n = 23). Patient and partner satisfaction with breast (r = 0.552), outcome (r = 0.465) as well as patient's perceived and self-report psychosocial well-being (r = 0.495) were highly correlated with partners scoring significantly higher (p<0.001). In terms of partner satisfaction, both reconstructive procedures achieved satisfactory results. ABR scored higher in terms of softness of breast and how natural the breast feels to touch whereas IBR was rated superior evaluating the breast size.

CONCLUSION

Both reconstructive procedures achieve satisfactory results in terms partner satisfaction whereas patient's psychosocial well-being was highly overestimated by their partners. Hence, partner inclusion in the regular psycho-oncological support might further sensitize them of the high psychological burden of a breast cancer diagnosis and therefore stabilize patients private support system.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .