Literature DB >> 26605889

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

Anne F Klassen1, Stefan J Cano2, Charles A East3, Stephen B Baker4, Lydia Badia5, Jonathan A Schwitzer6, Andrea L Pusic7.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Rhinoplasty continues to rank among the most popular cosmetic surgical treatments. Measuring what the nose looks like has typically involved the use of observer-reported or physician-reported outcome measures (eg, photographs). While objective outcomes are important, facial appearance is subjective, and asking patients what they think about the appearance of their nose is of paramount importance. The patient perspective can be measured using patient-reported outcome instruments.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the development and psychometric evaluation of the FACE-Q scales and adverse effects checklist designed to measure rhinoplasty outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A questionnaire was completed by patients recruited between July 13, 2010, and March 1, 2015. Psychometric methods were used to select the most clinically sensitive items for inclusion in item-reduced scales as well as to examine reliability, validity, and ability to detect clinical change. The setting was plastic surgery clinics in the United States, England, and Canada. Participants were preoperative and postoperative patients 18 years or older undergoing rhinoplasty. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Responses and validation measures of the FACE-Q scales and adverse effects checklist.
RESULTS: In total, 158 of 169 patients invited to participate in the study were enrolled (response rate, 93.5%). The most common adverse effect was the skin of the nose looking thick or swollen. Rasch measurement theory analysis led to the refinement of a 10-item Satisfaction With Nose Scale and a 5-item Satisfaction With Nostrils Scale. The person separation index and Cronbach α were 0.91 and 0.96, respectively, for the Satisfaction With Nose Scale and 0.89 and 0.96, respectively, for the Satisfaction With Nostrils Scale. All items had ordered thresholds and good item fit. Satisfaction with the nose and nostrils was incrementally lower in participants bothered by specific adverse effects (eg, the skin of the nose looking thick or swollen). Patient satisfaction on the Satisfaction With Nose Scale and the Satisfaction With Nostrils Scale and on 3 additional FACE-Q scales (ie, Satisfaction With Facial Appearance Scale, Psychological Function Scale, and Social Function Scale) was higher after surgery than before surgery (P < .001 for all, independent samples t test). Twenty-three participants who provided preoperative and postoperative data reported improvement on all 5 scales (P ≤ .003 for all). The effect sizes ranged from 0.6 to 2.3. Significant individual-level change was reported by most participants for the Satisfaction With Nose Scale, Satisfaction With Nostrils Scale, Satisfaction With Facial Appearance Scale, and Social Function Scale. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A FACE-Q scales rhinoplasty module can be used in clinical practice, research, and quality improvement to incorporate the patient perspective in outcome assessments. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26605889      PMCID: PMC4831065          DOI: 10.1001/jamafacial.2015.1445

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Facial Plast Surg        ISSN: 2168-6076            Impact factor:   4.611


  37 in total

1.  Outcomes research in facial plastic surgery: a review and new directions.

Authors:  R Alsarraf
Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg       Date:  2000 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.326

2.  Quality of life in patients who underwent rhinoplasty.

Authors:  Ramin Zojaji; Mozhdeh Keshavarzmanesh; Hamid Reza Arshadi; Morteza Mazloum Farsi Baf; Morteza Mazloum Farsi Baf; Sarvenaz Esmaeelzadeh; Sarvenaz Esmaeilzadeh
Journal:  Facial Plast Surg       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 1.446

Review 3.  Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria.

Authors:  Neil Aaronson; Jordi Alonso; Audrey Burnam; Kathleen N Lohr; Donald L Patrick; Edward Perrin; Ruth E Stein
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Rhinoplasty as a medicalized phenomenon: a 25-center survey on quality of life before and after cosmetic rhinoplasty.

Authors:  Marita Mohammadshahi; Abolghasem Pourreza; Parvaneh Heidari Orojlo; Mahmood Mahmoodi; Feizallah Akbari
Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg       Date:  2014-06-06       Impact factor: 2.326

5.  FACE-Q scales for health-related quality of life, early life impact, satisfaction with outcomes, and decision to have treatment: development and validation.

Authors:  Anne F Klassen; Stefan J Cano; Jonathan A Schwitzer; Amie M Scott; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.730

6.  The Derriford Appearance Scale (DAS59): a new psychometric scale for the evaluation of patients with disfigurements and aesthetic problems of appearance.

Authors:  D L Harris; A T Carr
Journal:  Br J Plast Surg       Date:  2001-04

7.  Patient-reported outcomes after endonasal rhinoplasty for the long nose.

Authors:  Cemal Cingi; Sema Zer Toros; Hamdi Cakli; Melek Kezban Gürbüz
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 1.046

8.  The effect of rhinoplasty on psychosocial distress level and quality of life.

Authors:  Ceren Günel; Imran Kurt Omurlu
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-09-14       Impact factor: 2.503

9.  Comparison of surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction after 2 different rhinoplasty techniques.

Authors:  Gokce Simsek; Erol Demirtas
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.046

10.  Development and validation of the Functional Rhinoplasty Outcome Inventory 17 (FROI-17).

Authors:  Cem Bulut; Frank Wallner; Peter K Plinkert; Ingo Baumann
Journal:  Rhinology       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 3.681

View more
  18 in total

1.  Linguistic validation of the "FACE-Q Rhinoplasty Module" in Italian.

Authors:  M Barone; A Cogliandro; N Di Stefano; R Aronica; V Tambone; P Persichetti
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-11-22       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 2.  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

3.  Long-term quality of life changes after primary septorhinoplasty.

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

4.  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

5.  Satisfaction in rhinoplasty: the possible impact of anxiety and functional outcome.

Authors:  Serap Koybasi; Yusuf Ozgur Bicer; Sinan Seyhan; Selcan Kesgin
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  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

7.  Analysis of Patient-Perceived Nasal Appearance Evaluations Following Functional Septorhinoplasty With Spreader Graft Placement.

Authors:  Jennifer C Fuller; Patricia A Levesque; Robin W Lindsay
Journal:  JAMA Facial Plast Surg       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 4.611

8.  Categorization and Analysis of Nasal Base Shapes Using a Parametric Model.

Authors:  Alisa Zhukhovitskaya; Dalan Cragun; Erica Su; Christian H Barnes; Brian J F Wong
Journal:  JAMA Facial Plast Surg       Date:  2019-09-01       Impact factor: 4.611

9.  Association Between Pain and Patient Satisfaction After Rhinoplasty.

Authors:  Shekhar K Gadkaree; David A Shaye; Jessica Occhiogrosso; Linda N Lee
Journal:  JAMA Facial Plast Surg       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 4.611

10.  Quantitative Analysis and Classification of the Nasal Base Using a Parametric Model.

Authors:  Christian H Barnes; Heidi Chen; Jason J Chen; Erica Su; Wesley J Moy; Brian J F Wong
Journal:  JAMA Facial Plast Surg       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 4.611

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.