A scoring system for 3D surface images of breast reconstruction developed using the Delphi consensus process |
| |
Institution: | 1. Royal Marsden Hospital, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5PT, UK;2. Institute of Cancer Research, 15 Cotswold Road, Sutton, London, SM2 5NG, UK;3. Imperial College NHS Foundation Trust, Fulham Palace Road, W6 8RF, UK;4. Royal Marsden Hospital, Fulham Road, Chelsea, London, SW3 6JJ, UK |
| |
Abstract: | IntroductionEvaluation of aesthetics after breast reconstruction is challenging. In the absence of an objective measurement, panel assessment is widely adopted. Heterogeneity of scales and poor internal consistency make comparison difficult. Development and validation of an expert panel scale using a Delphi consensus process is described. It was designed specifically for use as the gold standard for development of an objective evaluation tool using 3-Dimensional Surface Imaging (3D-SI).Materials and methods20 items relating to aesthetic assessment were identified for consideration in the Delphi consensus process. Items were selected for inclusion in the definitive panel scale by iterative rounds of voting according to importance, consensus discussion, and a final vote. The Delphi-derived scale was tested on a clinical research series for intra- and inter-panellist, and intra-panel reliability, and correlation with Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs).Results61 surgeons participated in the Delphi process. Oncoplastic and plastic surgeons were represented. The Delphi-derived scale included symmetry, volume, shape, position of breast mound, nipple position, and a global score. Intra-panellist reliability ranged from poor to almost perfect (wκ<0to0.86), inter-rater reliability was fair (ICC range 0.4–0.5) for individual items and good (ICC0.6) for the global score, intra-panel reliability was moderate to substantial (wκ0.4–0.7), and correlation with PROMs was moderate (r = 0.5p < 0.01).ConclusionsThe Delphi-derived panel evaluation is at least as good as other scales in the literature and has been developed specifically to provide expert evaluation of aesthetics after breast reconstruction. The logistical constraints of panel assessment remain, reinforcing the need to develop an objective evaluation method. |
| |
Keywords: | Aesthetic/reconstruction/breast/cancer PROMS"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0020"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"patient reported outcome measures BCT"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0030"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"breast conserving treatment 3D-SI"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0040"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"3-dimensional surface imaging ABS"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0050"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"association of breast surgery MOT"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0060"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"Medical Outcomes Trust ICC"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0070"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"intra-class correlation coefficient wκ"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0080"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"weighted kappa NAC"} {"#name":"keyword" "$":{"id":"kwrd0090"} "$$":[{"#name":"text" "_":"nipple areola complex |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|