Background: A patient decision aid (PtDA) can support shared decision making (SDM) in preference-sensitive care, with more than one clinically applicable treatment option. The development of a PtDA is a complex process, involving several steps, such as designing, developing and testing the draft with all the stakeholders, known as alpha testing. This is followed by testing in ‘real life’ situations, known as beta testing, and then finalising the definite version. Our aim was developing and alpha testing a PtDA for primary treatment of early stage breast cancer, ensuring that the tool is considered relevant, valid and feasible by patients and professionals. Methods: Our qualitative descriptive study applied various methods including face-to-face think-aloud interviews, a focus group and semi-structured telephone interviews. The study population consisted of breast cancer patients facing the choice between breast-conserving therapy with or without preceding neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and mastectomy, and professionals involved in breast cancer care in dedicated multidisciplinary breast cancer teams. Results: A PtDA was developed in four iterative test rounds, taking nearly 2 years, involving 26 patients and 26 professionals. While the research group initially opted for simplicity for the sake of implementation, the clinicians objected that the complexity of the decision could not be ignored. Other topics of concern were the conflicting views of professionals and patients regarding side effects, the amount of information and how to present it. Conclusion: The development was an extensive process, because the professionals rejected the simplifications proposed by the research group. This resulted in the development of a completely new draft PtDA, which took double the expected time and resources. The final version of the PtDA appeared to be well-appreciated by professionals and patients, although its acceptability will only be proven in actual practice (beta testing)
DOCUMENT
Physical activity (PA) can have a substantial benefit in the prevention, treatment andrehabilitation of (breast) cancer. Wearable devices offer possibilities to monitor PA,to provide feedback and to set targets. Although the market for PA related wearabledevices is booming, the impact of these wearables is questionable. One of the mainconcerns is the limitations to address individual needs of users, among which specificgroups such as women with breast cancer. Through design, we see opportunities tostimulate for self-enhancement while encouraging PA after cancer treatment.Following a constructive design research approach, Aymée was designed. Aymée is asmart bra that changes its pattern based on the amount of PA. Through thisinteraction, Aymée aims to reinforce women recovering from breast cancer to feelgood about themselves and to be (more) active. In this paper, we describe both thedesign approach in co-creation with former breast-cancer patients, as well as firstresults. We also discuss implications for designing intelligent systems that address PAencouragement.
DOCUMENT
Breast cancer is the most prevalent form of cancer that affects women worldwide, posing a significant burden on public health. While advancements in early detection and improved treatments have led to a remarkable 90% five-year survival rate and an 83% ten-year survival rate, this has also resulted in more prophylactic mastectomies being performed. Despite advancements in breast-conserving techniques, immunotherapy, and hormone therapy, many women still undergo mastectomies as part of their cancer treatment. In all cases, this results in scarring, and additional side effects from treatment modalities may arise. The loss of a breast can profoundly impact health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Although HRQoL has improved greatly during the recent years, systematic and local therapy having side effects is not uncommon, and this needs more attention.
DOCUMENT
Background: Follow‑up of curatively treated primary breast cancer patients consists of surveillance and aftercare and is currently mostly the same for all patients. A more personalized approach, based on patients’ individual risk of recurrence and personal needs and preferences, may reduce patient burden and reduce (healthcare) costs. The NABOR study will examine the (cost‑)effectiveness of personalized surveillance (PSP) and personalized aftercare plans (PAP) on patient‑reported cancer worry, self‑rated and overall quality of life and (cost‑)effectiveness. Methods: A prospective multicenter multiple interrupted time series (MITs) design is being used. In this design, 10 participating hospitals will be observed for a period of eighteen months, while they ‑stepwise‑ will transit from care as usual to PSPs and PAPs. The PSP contains decisions on the surveillance trajectory based on individual risks and needs, assessed with the ‘Breast Cancer Surveillance Decision Aid’ including the INFLUENCE prediction tool. The PAP contains decisions on the aftercare trajectory based on individual needs and preferences and available care resources, which decision‑making is supported by a patient decision aid. Patients are non‑metastasized female primary breast cancer patients (N= 1040) who are curatively treated and start follow‑up care. Patient reported outcomes will be measured at five points in time during two years of follow‑up care (starting about one year after treatment and every six months thereafter). In addition, data on diagnostics and hospital visits from patients’ Electronical Health Records (EHR) will be gathered. Primary outcomes are patient‑reported cancer worry (Cancer Worry Scale) and over‑all quality of life (as assessed with EQ‑VAS score). Secondary outcomes include health care costs and resource use, health‑related quality of life (as measured with EQ5D‑5L/SF‑12/EORTC‑QLQ‑C30), risk perception, shared decision‑making, patient satisfaction, societal participation, and cost‑effectiveness. Next, the uptake and appreciation of personalized plans and patients’ experiences of their decision‑making process will be evaluated. Discussion: This study will contribute to insight in the (cost‑)effectiveness of personalized follow‑up care and contributes to development of uniform evidence‑based guidelines, stimulating sustainable implementation of personalized surveillance and aftercare plans. Trial registration: Study sponsor: ZonMw. Retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (2023), ID: NCT05975437.
MULTIFILE
Objective: Effective healthcare innovations are often not adopted and implemented. An implementation strategy based on facilitators and barriers for use as perceived by healthcare professionals could increase adoption rates. This study therefore aimed to identify the most relevant facilitators and barriers for use of an innovative breast cancer aftercare decision aid (PtDA) in healthcare practice. Methods: Facilitators and barriers (related to the PtDA, adopter and healthcare organisation) were assessed among breast cancer aftercare health professionals (n = 81), using the MIDI questionnaire. For each category, a backward regression analysis was performed (dependent = intention to adopt). All significant factors were then added to a final regression analysis to identify to most relevant determinants of PtDA adoption. Results: Expecting higher compatibility with daily practice and clinical guidelines, more positive outcomes of use, higher perceived relevance for the patient and increased self-efficacy were significantly associated with a higher intention to adopt. Self-efficacy and perceived patient relevance remained significant in the final model. Conclusions: Low perceived self-efficacy and patient relevance are the most important barriers for health professions to adopt a breast cancer aftercare PtDA. Practice implications: To target self-efficacy and perceived patient relevance, the implementation strategy could apply health professional peer champions.
DOCUMENT
Purpose The purpose of this research was to explore women’s experiences after breast surgery with scar characteristics and symptoms, and its impact on their health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Material andmethods A qualitative study using semi-structured face-to-face interviewswas conducted among women following prophylactic, oncologic, or reconstructive breast surgery in the Netherlands. A directed content analysis was performed using guiding themes. Themes were “physical and sensory symptoms,” “impact of scar symptoms,” “personal factors,” “impact of scar interventions,” and “change over time.” Results The study population consisted of 26 women after breast surgery. Women experienced a wide range of symptoms like adherence, stiffness, pain, and uncomfortable sensations. Scar characteristics as visibility, location, texture, and size, influenced satisfaction with their appearance. The impact of scar symptoms is reflected in physical, social, emotional, and cognitive functioning, thereby affecting HRQOL. The experienced impact on HRQOL depended on several factors, like personal factors as the degree of acceptance and environmental factors like social support. Conclusion Women can experience a diversity of scar characteristics and symptoms, which play a central role in the perceived impact on HRQOL. Since scarring can have a considerable impact on HRQOL, scarring after prophylactic, oncologic and reconstructive breast surgery should be given more attention in clinical practice and research. Implications for Cancer Survivors Considering scarring as a common late effect after breast surgery and understanding the variety of experiences, which could impact HRQOL of women, can be beneficial in sufficient information provision, expectation management, and informed decision making.
DOCUMENT
Purpose: Breast cancer follow-up (surveillance and aftercare) varies from one-size-fits-all to more personalised approaches. A systematic review was performed to get insight in existing evidence on (cost-)efectiveness of personalised follow-up. Methods: PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane were searched between 01–01-2010 and 10–10-2022 (review registered in PROSPERO:CRD42022375770). The inclusion population comprised nonmetastatic breast cancer patients≥18 years, after completing curative treatment. All intervention-control studies studying personalised surveillance and/or aftercare designed for use during the entire follow-up period were included. All review processes including risk of bias assessment were performed by two reviewers. Characteristics of included studies were described. Results: Overall, 3708 publications were identifed, 64 full-text publications were read and 16 were included for data extraction. One study evaluated personalised surveillance. Various personalised aftercare interventions and outcomes were studied. Most common elements included in personalised aftercare plans were treatment summaries (75%), follow-up guidelines (56%), lists of available supportive care resources (38%) and PROs (25%). Control conditions mostly comprised usual care. Four out of seven (57%) studies reported improvements in quality of life following personalisation. Six studies (38%) found no personalisation efect, for multiple outcomes assessed (e.g. distress, satisfaction). One (6.3%) study was judged as low, four (25%) as high risk of bias and 11 (68.8%) as with concerns. Conclusion: The included studies varied in interventions, measurement instruments and outcomes, making it impossible to draw conclusions on the efectiveness of personalised follow-up. There is a need for a definition of both personalised surveillance and aftercare, whereafter outcomes can be measured according to uniform standards.
DOCUMENT
INTRODUCTION: An optimal relative dose intensity (RDI) of adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with better survival in patients with breast cancer. Little is known about the role of physical fitness in attaining an adequate RDI in patients with early stage breast cancer. We investigated the association between pre-treatment physical fitness and RDI in this population.METHODS: We pooled individual patient data from two randomized exercise trials that studied exercise programs in early breast cancer: the PACES (n = 230) and the PACT (N = 204) study. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between pre-treatment fitness and achieving an optimal RDI (≥85%). In addition, we added an interaction term to the model to explore the potential moderating effect of participating in an exercise program.RESULTS: Data were available for 419 patients (mean age at diagnosis 50.0 ± 8.6 years). In the total sample, lower pre-treatment physical fitness was associated with significantly lower odds of achieving ≥85% RDI: age-adjusted OR 0.66 [95%CI 0.46-0.94]. In patients allocated to the supervised exercise intervention during chemotherapy (n = 173), the association between pretreatment physical fitness and RDI was almost completely mitigated (OR 0.95 (95%CI 0.54-1.56)), while it was more pronounced in patients who received care as usual (n = 172, OR 0.31 (95%CI 0.13-0.63) pinteraction: 0.022).CONCLUSION: Early stage breast cancer patients with relatively lower levels of pretreatment physical fitness have lower odds of achieving an optimal dose of chemotherapy. Given that physical fitness is modifiable and our results suggest that following a moderate-to-high intensity exercise training during chemotherapy could improve treatment completion, clinicians should not refrain from referring patients to supportive exercise programs because of low fitness.
MULTIFILE
Purpose: This research aimed to explore factors associated with patient-reported breast and abdominal scar quality after deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction (BR). Material and Methods: This study was designed as a descriptive cross-sectional survey in which women after DIEP flap BR were invited to complete an online survey on breast and abdominal scarring. The online survey was distributed in the Netherlands in several ways in order to reach a diverse population of women. Outcomes were assessed with the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS). Additional items were assessed with a numeric rating scale (NRS). Results: A total of 248 women completed the survey. There was a statistically significant worse POSAS scar appraisal for the abdominal scar compared with the breast scar. The vast majority of women reported high scores on at least one scar characteristic of their breast scar or ab- dominal scar. Overall, color, stiffness, thickness, and irregularity scored higher than pain and itching. Women were only moderately positive about the size, noticeability, location, and the information provided regarding scarring. Conclusion: It is crucial to address the inevitability of scars in patient education before a DIEP flap BR, with a particular focus on the abdominal scar, as women experience abdominal scars significantly worse than their breast scars. Providing more information on the experience of other women and the expected appearance will contribute to having realistic expectations while allowing them to make well-informed decisions.
DOCUMENT
PurposeCancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) following chemotherapy is commonly reported in breast cancer survivors, even years after treatment. Data from preclinical studies suggest that exercise during chemotherapy may prevent or diminish cognitive problems; however, clinical data are scarce.MethodsThis is a pragmatic follow-up study of two original randomized trials, which compares breast cancer patients randomized to exercise during chemotherapy to non-exercise controls 8.5 years post-treatment. Cognitive outcomes include an online neuropsychological test battery and self-reported cognitive complaints. Cognitive performance was compared to normative data and expressed as age-adjusted z-scores.ResultsA total of 143 patients participated in the online cognitive testing. Overall, cognitive performance was mildly impaired on some, but not all, cognitive domains, with no significant differences between groups. Clinically relevant cognitive impairment was present in 25% to 40% of all participants, regardless of study group. We observed no statistically significant effect of exercise, or being physically active during chemotherapy, on long-term cognitive performance or self-reported cognition, except for the task reaction time, which favored the control group (β = -2.04, 95% confidence interval: -38.48; -2.38). We observed no significant association between self-reported higher physical activity levels during chemotherapy or at follow-up and better cognitive outcomes.ConclusionIn this pragmatic follow-up study, exercising and being overall more physically active during or after adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer was not associated with better tested or self-reported cognitive functioning, on average, 8.5 years after treatment. Future prospective studies are needed to document the complex relationship between exercise and CRCI in cancer survivors.
MULTIFILE
