Shortly after the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act passed in 1998, evidence arose about variable rates of breast reconstruction in the United States. That evidence showed that whether or not a woman had breast reconstruction depended a great deal on where she lived, what kind of health insurance she had, how much money she made, and her race/ethnicity.1 Twenty years later, practice variations in breast reconstruction persist. Surgeons, patients, and policymakers have responded with various initiatives to increase the use of reconstruction, such as awareness campaigns and laws that require surgeons to discuss the procedure. Although these efforts are reasonable, the issue of who should have breast reconstruction is not so simple. Rather, the effectiveness of breast reconstruction has not been fully established, and evidence of its overuse exists.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Offodile AC, Lee CN. Future Directions for Breast Reconstruction on the 20th Anniversary of the Women’s Health and Cancer Rights Act. JAMA Surg. 2018;153(7):605–606. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2018.0397
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: