Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Use of simulated digital photography in rhinoplasty to increase patient satisfaction

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
European Journal of Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The demand for cosmetic plastic surgeries have increased in the recent years, with rhinoplasty being one of the most commonly performed cosmetic procedures worldwide. This study aims to assess the effect of utilizing digital photography and computer simulation pre-operatively and whether it affects patient satisfaction with the surgery outcome.

Methods

This was a prospective pilot study of 51 participants; all were primary rhinoplasty cases conducted at a tertiary university hospital by a single surgeon. Data was collected from patients who underwent rhinoplasty from April 1, 2019, to November 30, 2019. All pre- and postoperative photos were taken using the VECTRA® H1 handheld imaging system (Canfield Scientific, Inc., NJ, USA) utilizing three photos taken at three different angles. To assess patients’ satisfaction, “Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) Questionnaire by Alsarraf” and “General Satisfaction Questionnaire” were used.

Results

Our data showed that the group who underwent simulation pre-operatively had a statistically significant result (P < 0.047) in regard to satisfaction with surgery outcome in comparison with the non-simulation group (P > 0.206).

Conclusions

This study highlighted the applicability of simulated digital photography in rhinoplasty for enhancing patient satisfaction. Patients could select their desired appearances, thus resulting in increased satisfaction.

Level of evidence: Level III, risk/prognostic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Loghmani S, Loghmani S, Baghi H, Hoghoughi MA, Dalvi F (2017) Demographic characteristics of patients undergoing rhinoplasty: a single center two-time-period comparison. World J Plast Surg 6(3):275–279

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Tasman A-J (2007) Rhinoplasty - indications and techniques. GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 6:Doc09

  3. Cingi C, Songu M, Bal C (2011) Outcomes research in rhinoplasty: body image and quality of life. Am J Rhinol Allergy 25(4):263–267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Thomassin JM, Bardot J, Radulesco T (2014) Rhinoplasty: medicolegal issues. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 59(6):592–595

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tysome JR, Sharp HR (2005) Current trends in photographic imaging for rhinoplasty surgery. Int J Otolaryngol 5(2)

  6. Steiger JD (2011) The rhinoplasty consult. Facial Plast Surg 27(5):393–396

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Alsarraf R (2000) Outcomes research in facial plastic surgery: a review and new directions. Aesthetic Plast Surg 24(3):192–197

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Alsarraf R, Larrabee WFJ, Anderson S, Murakami CS, Johnson CMJ (2001) Measuring cosmetic facial plastic surgery outcomes: a pilot study. Arch Facial Plast Surg 3(3):198–201

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kosowski TR, McCarthy C, Reavey PL et al (2009) A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures after facial cosmetic surgery and/or nonsurgical facial rejuvenation. Plast Reconstr Surg 123(6):1819–1827

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Vuyk HD, Stroomer J, Vinayak B (1998) The role of computer imaging in facial plastic surgery consultation: a clinical study. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 23(3):235–243

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Thomas JR, Freeman MS, Remmler DJ, Ehlert TK (1989) Analysis of patient response to preoperative computerized video imaging. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 115(7):793–796

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tardy MEJ, Dayan S, Hecht D (2002) Preoperative rhinoplasty: evaluation and analysis. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 35(1):1–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Harris D (1989) The benefits and hazards of cosmetic surgery. Br J Hosp Med 41(6):540–545

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Presented on the 26th Saudi Otorhinolaryngology Society Conference. It won the second best oral presentation in the resident competition.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Otolaryngology – Head & Neck Surgery, King Saud University, King Saud University Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    Amani Ahmad Obeid, Nouf Mohammad Aloraini & Ahmed Alarfaj

  2. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Ministry of National Guard-Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    Fahad Alobaid & Maryam Alsafi

Authors
  1. Amani Ahmad Obeid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fahad Alobaid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nouf Mohammad Aloraini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maryam Alsafi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ahmed Alarfaj
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Amani Obeid, concept, supervision data collection, writing of the manuscript, critical review; Fahad Alobaid, literature search, resources, data collection, writing manuscript, critical review; Nouf Aloraini, literature search, resources, data collection, writing manuscript, critical review; Maryam Alsafi, literature search, resources, data collection, writing manuscript, critical review; Ahmed Alarfaj, concept, supervision data collection, writing of the manuscript, critical review.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nouf Mohammad Aloraini.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of King Saud University (reference approval number of the study is IRB/0770/019).

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from the patients for their anonymized information to be published in this article.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent for publication

The authors affirm that human research participants provided informed consent for publication of the images in Figure 1.

Conflict of interest

Amani Obeid, Fahad Alobaid, Nouf Mohammad Aloraini, Maryam Alsafi, Ahmed Alarfaj declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

We declare that this manuscript is original, has never been published, or under the consideration for publication elsewhere (in part or in whole).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Obeid, A.A., Alobaid, F., Aloraini, N.M. et al. Use of simulated digital photography in rhinoplasty to increase patient satisfaction. Eur J Plast Surg 46, 35–40 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00238-022-01978-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00238-022-01978-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation