OBJECTIVE: To test 4 previously published outcomes instruments (the Facelift Outcomes Evaluation, the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation, the Blepharoplasty Outcomes Evaluation, and the Skin Rejuvenation Outcomes Evaluation) in terms of their reliability and validity in assessing patient-related outcomes of surgical intervention. DESIGN: A prospective pilot study of 78 patients in 3 similar private cosmetic surgery centers undergoing a total of 100 face-lift, rhinoplasty, blepharoplasty, and skin rejuvenation procedures. Patients were evaluated at 2 preoperative and 1 postoperative time points and the instruments were analyzed with regard to their test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and responsiveness to change. RESULTS: All 4 outcomes instruments had excellent reliability, consistency, and validity scores. Test-retest reliability was 0.74 to 0.83 (Pearson correlation coefficients), internal consistency scores were.83 to.88 (Cronbach alpha), and responsiveness to change was statistically significant for each instrument tested (P< or =.001). In addition, patients experienced significant quality of life improvement, with overall satisfaction increasing on average from 37% to more than 84% after these procedures. CONCLUSIONS: These 4 instruments are reliable and valid and can be used to accurately assess patient-related satisfaction in studies of face-lift, rhinoplasty, blepharoplasty, and skin resurfacing outcomes. These brief questionnaires provide the cosmetic surgeon with quantitative tools to evaluate otherwise subjective and purely qualitative outcomes and are recommended for use in future prospective studies.
OBJECTIVE: To test 4 previously published outcomes instruments (the Facelift Outcomes Evaluation, the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation, the Blepharoplasty Outcomes Evaluation, and the Skin Rejuvenation Outcomes Evaluation) in terms of their reliability and validity in assessing patient-related outcomes of surgical intervention. DESIGN: A prospective pilot study of 78 patients in 3 similar private cosmetic surgery centers undergoing a total of 100 face-lift, rhinoplasty, blepharoplasty, and skin rejuvenation procedures. Patients were evaluated at 2 preoperative and 1 postoperative time points and the instruments were analyzed with regard to their test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and responsiveness to change. RESULTS: All 4 outcomes instruments had excellent reliability, consistency, and validity scores. Test-retest reliability was 0.74 to 0.83 (Pearson correlation coefficients), internal consistency scores were.83 to.88 (Cronbach alpha), and responsiveness to change was statistically significant for each instrument tested (P< or =.001). In addition, patients experienced significant quality of life improvement, with overall satisfaction increasing on average from 37% to more than 84% after these procedures. CONCLUSIONS: These 4 instruments are reliable and valid and can be used to accurately assess patient-related satisfaction in studies of face-lift, rhinoplasty, blepharoplasty, and skin resurfacing outcomes. These brief questionnaires provide the cosmetic surgeon with quantitative tools to evaluate otherwise subjective and purely qualitative outcomes and are recommended for use in future prospective studies.
Authors: Olcay Cem Bulut; Frank Wallner; Dare Oladokun; Claire Kayser; Michaela Plath; Eric Schulz; Peter Karl Plinkert; Ingo Baumann Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-12-04 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Jonathan A Schwitzer; Frank P Albino; Ryan K Mathis; Amie M Scott; Laurie Gamble; Stephen B Baker Journal: Aesthet Surg J Date: 2015-06-10 Impact factor: 4.283
Authors: Donald Buck; Vinay Rawlani; Jeffrey Wayne; Gregory A Dumanian; Thomas A Mustoe; Neil A Fine; Robert Galiano; John Ys Kim Journal: Can J Plast Surg Date: 2012