Table 3 Satisfaction survey results
From: Clinical observation of the regeneration process of defects after breast cancer resection
Patient | Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Surgeon | |||||
Traditional breast conserving surgery (n = 41) | Excellent | 12 | 2 | – | – |
Good | 2 | 4 | – | – | |
Fair | – | 2 | 5 | 3 | |
Poor | – | – | 5 | 6 | |
Oxidized regenerated cellulose (n = 41) | Excellent | 18 | 3 | – | – |
Good | 7 | 5 | – | – | |
Fair | – | 3 | – | – | |
Poor | – | – | 1 | 4 | |
Gelatin sponge (n = 43) | Excellent | 15 | 8 | – | – |
Good | 8 | 3 | – | – | |
Fair | 1 | 2 | 1 | – | |
Poor | – | – | 2 | 3 |