Literature DB >> 29135891

Evaluation of Preoperative and Postoperative Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life in Patients Undergoing Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Fang Yang1,2, Yin Liu1,2, Hong Xiao1,2, Yuan Li1,2, Huanying Cun1,2, Yanan Zhao1,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Improvement of nasal aesthetics by means of rhinoplasty is a highly sought-after procedure and leads to increased patient confidence. The aim of the study was to provide a quantitative synthesis of existing data regarding the ability of cosmetofunctional rhinoplasty to improve patient satisfaction and quality of life measured by the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation scale.
METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for studies evaluating quality of life following aesthetic rhinoplasty. Study results were pooled and analyzed using a random effects model. Effect size was estimated using standardized mean difference at a 95 percent confidence interval. Heterogeneity and benefit were assessed and reported using the I and standard mean difference. Subgroup analyses were performed based on follow-up period and age group segregation.
RESULTS: A total of 377 articles were retrieved, of which eight studies were included in the final analysis. Overall, patient satisfaction analyzed by pooling eight observational studies improved following cosmetofunctional rhinoplasty (standard mean difference, 5.87; 95 percent CI, 3.55 to 8.19; I = 100 percent). In addition, further subgroup analyses revealed that maximum benefit was derived by younger patients (standard mean difference, 6.69; 95 percent CI, 3.65 to 9.74; I = 99 percent) compared with older patients (standard mean difference, 3.48; 95 percent CI, 3.01 to 3.96; I = 0 percent). Postoperative patient satisfaction levels showed maximum improvement during a follow-up period of 6 to 12 months (standard mean difference, 11.07; 95 percent CI, -8.79 to 32.12; I = 100 percent).
CONCLUSION: Cosmetofunctional rhinoplasty improves patients' quality of life as evidenced by an improvement in Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation scores. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29135891     DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004102

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


  4 in total

1.  Change in surgeon for revision rhinoplasty: The impact of patient demographics and surgical technique on patient retention.

Authors:  Kayva L Crawford; Jason H Lee; Bharat A Panuganti; Brittany N Burton; Aria Jafari; David B Hom; Deborah Watson
Journal:  Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol       Date:  2020-11-12

2.  Overall quality of life impact on candidates for septorhinoplasty according to the World Health Organization quality of life brief questionnaire (WHOQOL-Brief).

Authors:  Paula de Oliveira Oppermann; Luísi Rabaioli; Cassia Feijó; Natália Paseto Pilati; Emily Nicole Hrisomalos; Raphaella de Oliveira Migliavacca; Michelle Lavinsky-Wolff
Journal:  Braz J Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2020-09-14

3.  Validation and clinical application of the Arabic rhinoplasty outcomes evaluation questionnaire.

Authors:  Dhaifallah S Mulafikh; Sami E Alharethy; Almaha A Alqabbani; Tamer A Mesallam
Journal:  Saudi Med J       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 1.422

4.  Assessment of Rhinoplasty Outcomes with FACE-Q Rhinoplasty Module: Norwegian Linguistic Validation and Clinical Application in 243 Patients.

Authors:  Amin Kalaaji; Stine Dreyer; Jakob Schnegg; Lena Sanosyan; Tatjana Radovic; Ivana Maric
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2019-09-30
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.