Literature DB >> 19483584

A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures after facial cosmetic surgery and/or nonsurgical facial rejuvenation.

Tomasz R Kosowski1, Colleen McCarthy, Patrick L Reavey, Amie M Scott, Edwin G Wilkins, Stefan J Cano, Anne F Klassen, Nicholas Carr, Peter G Cordeiro, Andrea L Pusic.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction and improved quality of life are the predominant considerations determining success in cosmetic surgery. However, few studies have examined patients' perceptions of their appearance following cosmetic facial surgery and/or nonsurgical facial rejuvenation. This study identified patient-reported outcome measures developed and validated for use in patients undergoing surgical and/or nonsurgical cosmetic procedures.
METHODS: A systematic review of the English-language literature was performed. Patient-reported outcome measures designed to assess patient satisfaction and/or quality of life following surgical and/or nonsurgical cosmetic procedures were identified. Qualifying instruments were assessed for content and adherence to international guidelines for development and validation.
RESULTS: From 442 articles, 47 patient-reported outcome measures assessing facial appearance after a cosmetic procedure were identified. Only nine questionnaires satisfied inclusion and exclusion criteria. These measures were subdivided into the following categories: rhinoplasty (Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation, Glasgow Benefit Inventory, Facial Appearance Sorting Test), skin rejuvenation (Facial Lines Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire, Skin Rejuvenation Outcomes Evaluation, Facial Lines Outcomes Questionnaire), face lift (Facelift Outcomes Evaluation), blepharoplasty (Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation), and general appearance (Derriford Appearance Scale 59). None of these measures satisfied all guidelines. All measures were limited by either their development, their validation, or their content.
CONCLUSIONS: Valid, reliable, and responsive instruments designed to measure patient-reported outcomes following surgical and nonsurgical facial rejuvenation are lacking. A patient-reported outcome measure that represents perceptions of facial cosmetic surgery patients and satisfies accepted health measurement criteria is needed. It would facilitate comparison of techniques and quantification of positive effects, and aid surgeons seeking to quantify outcomes in their own practices.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19483584     DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181a3f361

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0032-1052            Impact factor:   4.730


  29 in total

Review 1.  A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures after rhinoplasty.

Authors:  M Barone; A Cogliandro; N Di Stefano; V Tambone; P Persichetti
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Measurements of self-efficacy in musculoskeletal rehabilitation: A systematic review.

Authors:  Kelsey J Picha; Kate N Jochimsen; Nicholas R Heebner; John P Abt; Ellen L Usher; Gilson Capilouto; Tim L Uhl
Journal:  Musculoskeletal Care       Date:  2018-09-20

3.  Measuring quality of life in oculoplastic patients.

Authors:  Edward Ridyard; Clare Inkster
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 1.779

4.  A randomized controlled trial of skin care protocols for facial resurfacing: lessons learned from the Plastic Surgery Educational Foundation's Skin Products Assessment Research study.

Authors:  Christopher J Pannucci; Patrick L Reavey; Susan Kaweski; Jennifer B Hamill; Keith M Hume; Edwin G Wilkins; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 4.730

5.  Patient reported outcome measures in septorhinoplasty surgery.

Authors:  T C Biggs; L R Fraser; M J Ward; V S Sunkaraneni; P G Harries; R J Salib
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 1.891

6.  Assessing Improvement of Facial Appearance and Quality of Life after Minimally-Invasive Cosmetic Dermatology Procedures Using the FACE-Q Scales.

Authors:  Brian P Hibler; Jonathan Schwitzer; Anthony M Rossi
Journal:  J Drugs Dermatol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 2.114

7.  Development and Psychometric Validation of the FACE-Q Skin, Lips, and Facial Rhytids Appearance Scales and Adverse Effects Checklists for Cosmetic Procedures.

Authors:  Anne F Klassen; Stefan J Cano; Jonathan A Schwitzer; Stephen B Baker; Alastair Carruthers; Jean Carruthers; Anne Chapas; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 10.282

Review 8.  How to use outcomes questionnaires: pearls and pitfalls.

Authors:  Sunitha Malay; Kevin C Chung
Journal:  Clin Plast Surg       Date:  2012-11-26       Impact factor: 2.017

9.  Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the FACE-Q Scales for Patients Undergoing Rhinoplasty.

Authors:  Anne F Klassen; Stefan J Cano; Charles A East; Stephen B Baker; Lydia Badia; Jonathan A Schwitzer; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  JAMA Facial Plast Surg       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.611

10.  Self-Report Scales to Measure Expectations and Appearance-Related Psychosocial Distress in Patients Seeking Cosmetic Treatments.

Authors:  Anne F Klassen; Stefan J Cano; Amy Alderman; Charles East; Lydia Badia; Stephen B Baker; Sam Robson; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Aesthet Surg J       Date:  2016-05-24       Impact factor: 4.283

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.