Translation and cultural adaptation of the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS) into Brazilian Portuguese

Vieira, René Aloísio da Costa; Silva, Fabíola Cristina Brandini da; Silva, Maria Elis Sylvestre; Silva, Jonathas José da; Sarri, Almir José; Paiva, Carlos Eduardo

doi:10.1590/1806-9282.64.07.627

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The data in the medical records were retrospectively evaluated through standardized records. The BCTOS is a specific questionnaire that was translated into the Brazilian Portuguese language for use in patients who undergo BCT [25]. This questionnaire contains 22 questions divided into 4 domains (functional, cosmetic, pain, and oedema); the cosmetic domain consists of 8 questions.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oncoplastic Surgery in Breast-Conserving Treatment: Patient Profile and Impact on Quality of Life

Oliveira‐Junior

Silva

et al. 2020

Breast Care

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Breast-conserving treatment (BCT) provides better quality of life (QL) than mastectomy without reconstruction. Oncoplastic surgery (OS) encompasses a series of surgical techniques, increasing the indications for BCT, but few studies have evaluated the impact on QL in patients who undergo BCT with OS. Materials and Methods: A prospective, cross-sectional study was conducted in women who underwent BCT. We evaluated the characteristics of patients who underwent BCT with and without OS and the associated QL. QL was assessed through the EORTC QLQ-30, EORTC QLQ-BR23, and Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS) questionnaires. Results: A total of 300 patients underwent BCT, 72 underwent breast OS, and 37 underwent bilateral surgery. Patients who underwent OS were younger (p = 0.004), had a higher level of education (p = 0.01), had a smaller time interval since the end of treatment (p = 0.02), had tumours with greater dimensions (p = 0.003), and were more likely to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.05). Based on the QL questionnaires, no difference was observed between the groups. Breast symmetry was not associated with high patient satisfaction (p = 0.55). Conclusion: Despite the fact that OS was performed in patients with worse tumour conditions and in more demanding patients, OS allowed similar cosmetic results to classical BCT.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oncoplastic Surgery in Breast-Conserving Treatment: Patient Profile and Impact on Quality of Life

Oliveira‐Junior

Silva

et al. 2020

Breast Care

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All studies were conducted between 2001 and 2019 and three studies [22][23][24] were reported in non-English language publications (Refer to Table 2). While the majority of studies were conducted in Brazil (n = 12) and Turkey (n = 9), most other regions with LMIC were represented, including: South America (n = 12) [5,20,24,[32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39]49] [47,48,54] and East Asia and Pacific (n = 1) [46].…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence and incidence of cancer related lymphedema in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Little is known about the prevalence and incidence in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) of secondary lymphedema due to cancer. The purpose of the study is to estimate the prevalence and incidence in LMICs of secondary lymphedema related to cancer and/or its treatment(s) and identify risk factors. Method: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched in June 2019 for peer-reviewed articles that assessed prevalence and/or incidence of cancer-related lymphedema in LMICs. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Prevalence Studies. Estimates of pooled prevalence and incidence estimates were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI), with subgroup analyses grouping studies according to: country of origin, study design, risk of bias, setting, treatment, and lymphedema site and measurement. Heterogeneity was measured using X 2 and I 2 , with interpretation guided by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. Results: Of 8766 articles, 36 were included. Most reported on arm lymphedema secondary to breast cancer treatment (n = 31), with the remainder reporting on leg lymphedema following gynecological cancer treatment (n = 5). Arm lymphedema was mostly measured by arm circumference (n = 16/31 studies), and leg lymphedema through self-report (n = 3/5 studies). Eight studies used more than one lymphedema measurement. Only two studies that measured prevalence of leg lymphedema could be included in a meta-analysis (pooled prevalence = 10.0, 95% CI 7.0-13.0, I 2 = 0%). The pooled prevalence of arm lymphedema was 27%, with considerable heterogeneity (95% CI 20.0-34.0, I 2 = 94.69%, n = 13 studies). The pooled incidence for arm lymphedema was 21%, also with considerable heterogeneity (95% CI 15.0-26.0, I 2 = 95.29%, n = 11 studies). There was evidence that higher body mass index (> 25) was associated with increased risk of arm lymphedema (OR: 1.98, 95% CI 1.45-2.70, I 2 = 84.0%, P < 0.0001, n = 4 studies).

show abstract

“…While the majority of studies were conducted in Brazil (n=12) and Turkey (n=9), most other regions with LMIC were represented, including: South America (n=12) (5,19,(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32), Europe (n=11) (20,22,(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41), Southern Asia (n=6) (42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47), West Africa (n=3) (21,48,49), Middle East (n=3) (50)(51)(52) and East Asia and Pacific (n=1) (53).…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence and incidence of cancer related lymphedema in low and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Torgbenu

Luckett

Buhagiar

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract Background Little is known about the prevalence and incidence in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) of secondary lymphedema due to cancer. This study aims to estimate the prevalence and incidence in LMICs of secondary lymphedema related to cancer and/or its treatment(s) and identify risk factors. Method A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched in June 2019 for peer-reviewed articles that assessed prevalence and/or incidence of cancer-related lymphedema in LMICs. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Prevalence Studies. Estimates of pooled prevalence and incidence estimates were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI), with sub-group analyses grouping studies according to: country of origin, study design, risk of bias, setting, treatment, and lymphedema site and measurement. Heterogeneity was measured using X ² and I 2 , with interpretation guided by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. Results Of 8766 articles, 36 were included. Most reported on arm lymphedema secondary to breast cancer treatment (n=31), with the remainder reporting on leg lymphedema following gynecological cancer treatment (n=5). Arm lymphedema was mostly measured by arm circumference (n=16/31 studies), and leg lymphedema through self-report (n=3/5 studies). Eight studies used more than one lymphedema measurement. Only two studies that measured prevalence of leg lymphedema could be included in a meta-analysis (pooled prevalence =10.0%, 95%CI 7.0 – 13.0, I 2 =0%). The pooled prevalence of arm lymphedema was 27%, with considerable heterogeneity (95%CI 20.0 – 34.0, I 2 =94.69%, n =13 studies). The pooled incidence for arm lymphedema was 21%, also with considerable heterogeneity (95%CI 15.0 – 26.0, I 2 =95.29%, n =11 studies). There was evidence that higher BMI (>25) was associated with increased risk of arm lymphedema (OR: 1.98, 95%CI 1.45 – 2.70, I 2 =84.0%, P< 0.0001, n =4 studies). Conclusion Better understanding the factors that contribute to variability in cancer-related arm lymphedema in LMICs is an important first step to developing targeted interventions to improve quality of life. Standardising measurement of lymphedema globally and better reporting would enable comparison within the context of information about cancer treatments and lymphedema care.

show abstract

Translation and cultural adaptation of the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS) into Brazilian Portuguese

Cited by 10 publications

References 20 publications

Oncoplastic Surgery in Breast-Conserving Treatment: Patient Profile and Impact on Quality of Life

Oncoplastic Surgery in Breast-Conserving Treatment: Patient Profile and Impact on Quality of Life

Prevalence and incidence of cancer related lymphedema in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Prevalence and incidence of cancer related lymphedema in low and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About