John S Rhee1, Brian T McMullin. 1. Department of Otolaryngology and Communication Sciences, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA. jrhee@mcw.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To survey the existing literature to identify, summarize, and evaluate procedure- and condition-specific outcome measures for use in facial plastic and reconstructive surgery. METHODS: A review of the English-language literature was performed to identify outcomes instruments specific for targeted facial plastic surgery interventions and conditions. A search was performed using MEDLINE (1950 to September 2007), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health) (1982 to September 2007), and PsychINFO (1806 to September 2007). Outcomes instruments were categorized as patient-reported or clinical efficacy measures (observer-reported or objective measures). Instruments were then categorized to include relevant details on the intervention, degree of validation, and subsequent use. RESULTS: Sixty-eight distinct instruments were identified (23 patient-reported, 35 observer-reported, and 10 objective measures), with some overlap among categories. Most patient-reported measures (76%) and half observer-reported instruments (51%) were developed in the past 10 years. The rigor of validation varied widely among measures, with formal validation being most common among the patient-reported outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Validated outcomes measures are present for many common facial plastic surgery conditions and have become more prevalent during the past decade, especially for patient-reported outcomes. Challenges remain in harmonizing patient-reported, observer-based, and other objective measures to produce standardized clinically meaningful outcome measures.
OBJECTIVE: To survey the existing literature to identify, summarize, and evaluate procedure- and condition-specific outcome measures for use in facial plastic and reconstructive surgery. METHODS: A review of the English-language literature was performed to identify outcomes instruments specific for targeted facial plastic surgery interventions and conditions. A search was performed using MEDLINE (1950 to September 2007), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health) (1982 to September 2007), and PsychINFO (1806 to September 2007). Outcomes instruments were categorized as patient-reported or clinical efficacy measures (observer-reported or objective measures). Instruments were then categorized to include relevant details on the intervention, degree of validation, and subsequent use. RESULTS: Sixty-eight distinct instruments were identified (23 patient-reported, 35 observer-reported, and 10 objective measures), with some overlap among categories. Most patient-reported measures (76%) and half observer-reported instruments (51%) were developed in the past 10 years. The rigor of validation varied widely among measures, with formal validation being most common among the patient-reported outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Validated outcomes measures are present for many common facial plastic surgery conditions and have become more prevalent during the past decade, especially for patient-reported outcomes. Challenges remain in harmonizing patient-reported, observer-based, and other objective measures to produce standardized clinically meaningful outcome measures.
Authors: Chi Lap Nicholas Tsang; Theresa Nguyen; Torunn Sivesind; Anders Cervin Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2018-01-13 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Abdulrahman Takiddin; Mohammad Shaqfeh; Osman Boyaci; Erchin Serpedin; Mitchell A Stotland Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2022-01-18
Authors: Erika Strazdins; Yu Feng Nie; Raziqah Ramli; Tom Palesy; Jenna M Christensen; George Nicholas Marcells; Richard John Harvey Journal: JAMA Facial Plast Surg Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 4.611