We have located links that may give you full text access.
Aesthetics Assessment and Patient Reported Outcome of Nasolabial Aesthetics in 18-Year-Old Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip.
Cleft Palate-craniofacial Journal 2019 Februrary 27
OBJECTIVE:: To determine if there is a correlation between objective nasolabial aesthetics assessment using the Cleft Aesthetic Rating Scale (CARS) and patient satisfaction.
DESIGN:: Retrospective analysis of a generic satisfaction questionnaire and independent assessment by three cleft surgeons of the nasolabial area of these patients on 2D frontal photographs, using the CARS.
SETTING:: The Vrije Universiteit Medical Center and The Academic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam.
PATIENTS:: Thirty-nine 18-year old patients with a repaired complete or incomplete unilateral cleft lip, with or without a cleft palate, and a completed satisfaction questionnaire. Exclusion criteria were an incomplete questionnaire; a history of facial trauma; and congenital syndromes affecting facial appearance.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:: The correlation between surgeon evaluation (on a 5-point Likert scale) and patient satisfaction (not, moderately or very satisfied) on nasolabial appearance was assessed using Spearman rho (ρ).
RESULTS:: There was a negligible correlation between surgeon evaluation and patient satisfaction on nose assessment (ρ = 0.20) and a moderate correlation on lip assessment (ρ = 0.32).
CONCLUSIONS:: Most literature supports this discrepancy between different objective aesthetics evaluation methods and subjective patient-reported outcome measures, suggesting there are factors playing a role in patient satisfaction that are impossible to objectify with assessment methods. Therefore, a strong emphasis should remain on clear communication between the physician and patient regarding their expectations, perception, and satisfaction of surgery results.
DESIGN:: Retrospective analysis of a generic satisfaction questionnaire and independent assessment by three cleft surgeons of the nasolabial area of these patients on 2D frontal photographs, using the CARS.
SETTING:: The Vrije Universiteit Medical Center and The Academic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam.
PATIENTS:: Thirty-nine 18-year old patients with a repaired complete or incomplete unilateral cleft lip, with or without a cleft palate, and a completed satisfaction questionnaire. Exclusion criteria were an incomplete questionnaire; a history of facial trauma; and congenital syndromes affecting facial appearance.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:: The correlation between surgeon evaluation (on a 5-point Likert scale) and patient satisfaction (not, moderately or very satisfied) on nasolabial appearance was assessed using Spearman rho (ρ).
RESULTS:: There was a negligible correlation between surgeon evaluation and patient satisfaction on nose assessment (ρ = 0.20) and a moderate correlation on lip assessment (ρ = 0.32).
CONCLUSIONS:: Most literature supports this discrepancy between different objective aesthetics evaluation methods and subjective patient-reported outcome measures, suggesting there are factors playing a role in patient satisfaction that are impossible to objectify with assessment methods. Therefore, a strong emphasis should remain on clear communication between the physician and patient regarding their expectations, perception, and satisfaction of surgery results.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app