Background To evaluate the quality of life (QOL) of breast cancer survivors who have undergone breast reconstruction and have breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). Methods Patients with a ...unilateral mastectomy with or without breast reconstruction were evaluated for BCRL and their QOL. Patients were divided into a non-BCRL and a BCRL group. Patients with subjective complaints of arm swelling and/or an interlimb volume difference of >200 mL, or undergoing treatment for arm lymphedema were defined as having BCRL. QOL was assessed using cancer-specific (EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-B23) and disease specific (Lymph-ICF) questionnaires. Results In total, 253 patients with a mean follow-up time of 51.7 (standard deviation = 18.5) months since mastectomy completed the QOL questionnaires. Of these patients, 116 (46%) underwent mastectomy alone and 137 (54%) had additional breast reconstruction. A comparison of the QOL scores of 180 patients in the non-BCRL group showed a significantly better physical function (p = 0.004) for patients with reconstructive surgery compared with mastectomy patients. In the 73 patients with BCRL, a comparison of the QOL scores showed no significant differences between patients with mastectomy and reconstructive surgery. After adjusting for potential confounders, multivariate analysis showed a significant impact of BCRL on physical function (β = - 7.46; p = 0.009), role function (β = - 15.75; p = 0.003), cognitive function (β = - 11.56; p = 0.005), body vision (β = - 11.62; p = 0.007), arm symptoms (β = 20.78; p = 0.000), and all domains of the Lymph-ICF questionnaire. Conclusions This study implies that BCRL has a negative effect on the QOL of breast cancer survivors, potentially negating the positive effects on QOL reconstructive breast surgery has.
Accumulating evidence shows that ultrasound (US) guidance improves effectiveness and safety of central venous catheter (CVC) placement. Several international guidelines therefore recommend the use of ...US for placement of CVCs. However, surveys show that the landmark-based technique is still widely used, while the percentage of physicians using US is increasing less than expected. The goal of this study was to investigate current practice for central venous catheterization in anaesthesiology and intensive care in the Netherlands, identify barriers for further implementation of US guidance and to evaluate whether personality traits are associated with the choice of technique. We conducted a web-based national survey, distributed among members of the Dutch societies of anaesthesiology (NVA) and intensive care (NVIC). The survey contained questions regarding physician and hospital characteristics, frequency of US use and reasons for use or non-use, as well as the NEO-FFI-3, a validated, translated questionnaire to characterize personality traits according to the ‘Big Five’ concept. Response rate was 22% (506/2291), of which 400 had also the personality questionnaire complete. Ultrasound guidance was used always or almost always in 68%; barriers for US use were working in a non-academic non-teaching hospital, providing cardiac anaesthesia and more years of physician experience. Reasons for not using US were perceived lack of benefit, increased procedure time, lack of US equipment and fear of loss of landmark technique skills. 13% of respondents had never experienced a complication during CVC placement, and 67% knew of a complication occurring the past year at their department. Ultrasound was thought not to be able to prevent the complication in half of these cases. Of the personality traits, only neuroticism and extraversion showed a minor positive association with US guidance. A majority of anaesthesiologists and intensivists uses US guidance for CVC placement, but a significant proportion of physicians still prefers the landmark technique. Most arguments from respondents against US guidance can be challenged. Personality traits most likely do not play a major role in the acceptance of US guidance for central venous catheterization. A potential intervention to increase US use could be formalizing local hospital policies mandating compliance with US guidance. Future research can perhaps focus on cognitive biases that currently limit more widespread use of US guidance.
PDF