Systematic Review of Quality-of-Life Measurement After Aesthetic Rhinoplasty
- 176 Downloads
The assessment of outcomes in aesthetic rhinoplasty is highly relevant because patient satisfaction and improved health-related quality of life (QoL) are the predominant factors in determining success. The patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) employed in rhinoplasty research studies are remarkably diverse, thus yielding difficulties with data analysis. The aim of this article is to provide a comprehensive review of the literature to reveal the relevance of the QoL assessment for rhinosurgeons.
A systematic literature search with the terms “Rhinoplasty” and “Quality of Life” was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar and Cochrane databases. Primarily, all publications related to QoL following aesthetic rhinoplasty between 2002 and 2017 were identified. As a secondary selection, we focused on articles with a prospective study design, a significant cohort size (at least 50 patients) and a follow-up period of at least 6 months after aesthetic rhinoplasty.
A total of 62 PROM studies assessing QoL following aesthetic rhinoplasties were obtained. We ascertained an increasing publication rate of QoL articles over the last 15 years. Only 17 studies satisfied comprehensive inclusion criteria of a high qualitative study selection. The Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation was the most frequently used QoL questionnaire of the secondary selection (70.6%). The total number of 16 various questionnaires exhibit high heterogeneity.
Our data strengthen the increasing importance of the assessment of QoL after rhinoplasty. Despite a lack of reliable publications with considerable heterogeneity and large variability in outcomes, functional-aesthetic rhinoplasty leads to a significant improvement of patient’s health-related QoL.
Level of Evidence II
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
KeywordsRhinoplasty Patient satisfaction Systematic review Outcome assessment Quality of life
The authors do not have any commercial associations that might pose or create a conflict of interest with information presented in this article.
- 22.Lohuis PJ, Datema FR (2015) Patient satisfaction in Caucasian and Mediterranean open rhinoplasty using the tongue-in-groove technique: prospective statistical analysis of change in subjective body image in relation to nasal appearance following aesthetic rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 125:831–836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Bulut OC, Wallner F, Oladokun D, Plinkert PK, Baumann I, Hohenberger R (2018) Patients screening positive for body dysmorphic disorder show no significant health-related quality of life gain after functional septorhinoplasty at a Tertiary Referral Center. Facial Plast Surg 34:318–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 48.Lohuis PJ, Faraj-Hakim S, Knobbe A, Duivesteijn W, Bran GM (2012) Split hump technique for reduction of the overprojected nasal dorsum: a statistical analysis on subjective body image in relation to nasal appearance and nasal patency in 97 patients undergoing aesthetic rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg 14:346–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 55.Baykal B, Erdim I, Kayhan FT, Oghan F (2014) Comparative analysis of nasal deformities according to patient satisfaction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 72(603):e601–e607Google Scholar