Breast Surgery Breast Surgery Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Breast Implant Surgery: A Pilot Study Sze Ng, MBBS; Andrea Pusic, MD; Emily Parker, BSc, PhD; Swarna Vishwanath, MBA; Rodney D. Cooter, MBBS, PhD; Elisabeth Elder, MBBS, PhD; Colin Moore, MBBS; John McNeil, MBBS, PhD; and Ingrid Hopper, MBBS, PhD Abstract Background: The Breast-Q Implant Surveillance module (BREAST-Q IS) is a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that asks 5 questions on satisfaction (shape, feel, and rippling) and symptoms (pain and tightness) derived from the BREAST-Q. Objectives: We aimed to pilot BREAST-Q IS on patients within the Australian Breast Device Registry (ABDR), an opt-out clinical quality device registry, and explored Short Message Service (SMS) communication as a follow-up method. Methods: Patients with a breast device surgery in the previous 10 to 15 months, age ≥18 years, with a mobile phone number, were invited to complete the 5-question PROM via SMS initially, followed by 3 phone call attempts if no response, an e-mail, and then a letter by post as a final engagement strategy. Results: The study included 197 participants [breast augmentation (BA) = 118; breast reconstruction (BR) = 79]. Mean ± SD age was 40 ± 12 years (BA) and 44 ± 11 years (BR). Mean ± SD time since surgery was 414 ± 36 days (BA) and 413 ± 51 days (BR). The total response rate, including opt-outs, was 76%. Responses indicated that >90% of BA and >79% of BR were very or somewhat satisfied with shape, feel, and wrinkling; >70% of BA and >46% of BR reported no pain or tightness. Completion of survey via SMS was 51% (BA) and 55% (BR). Further responses were received by phone (25%, 26%), post (21%, 16%), and e-mail (3%, 3%). Conclusions: This pilot demonstrated high levels of satisfaction and low levels of pain and tightness in patients with breast augmentation and breast reconstruction 1 year postoperatively. It also showed the effectiveness of our engagement strategy, which achieved a 76% response rate. Over 50% of respondents used SMS to reply to a 5-question PROM assessing long-term surgical outcomes. This engagement strategy will be used as BREAST-Q IS is rolled out nationally. Editorial Decision date: January 18, 2019; online publish-ahead-of-print February 3, 2019. DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjz023 www.aestheticsurgeryjournal.com © 2019 The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Inc. Reprints and permission: journals. permissions@oup.com Aesthetic Surgery Journal 2019, Vol 39(8) NP314–NP321 Dr Ng is a Research Offcer, Dr Parker is a Senior Research Fellow, and Ms Vishwanath is a Research Assistant, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Dr Pusic is a Plastic Surgeon, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. Prof Cooter is a Plastic Surgeon, Australian Society of Plastic Surgeons, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Prof Elder is a Breast Surgeon, Breast Surgeons of Australia and New Zealand, Randwick, New South Wales, Australia. Prof Moore is a Cosmetic Surgeon, Australasian College of Cosmetic Surgery, Parramatta, New South Wales, Australia. Prof McNeil is the Head of School and Dr Hopper is the Head of Drug and Devices Registries, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Corresponding Author: Dr Ingrid Hopper, Head, Drug and Devices Registries, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, 553 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia. E-mail: ingrid.hopper@monash.edu; Twitter: @BreastDeviceReg Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/asj/article/39/8/NP314/5306134 by guest on 19 September 2021