Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Applying Machine Learning to Determine Popular Patient Questions About Mentoplasty on Social Media

  • Original Article
  • Facial Surgery
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Patient satisfaction in esthetic surgery often necessitates synergy between patient and physician goals. The authors aim to characterize patient questions before and after mentoplasty to reflect the patient perspective and enhance the physician–patient relationship.

Methods

Mentoplasty reviews were gathered from Realself.com using an automated web crawler. Questions were defined as preoperative or postoperative. Each question was reviewed and characterized by the authors into general categories to best reflect the overall theme of the question. A machine learning approach was utilized to create a list of the most common patient questions, asked both preoperatively and postoperatively.

Results

A total of 2,012 questions were collected. Of these, 1,708 (84.9%) and 304 (15.1%) preoperative and postoperative questions, respectively. The primary category for patients preoperatively was “eligibility for surgery” (86.3%), followed by “surgical techniques and logistics” (5.4%) and “cost” (5.4%). Of the postoperative questions, the most common questions were about “options to revise surgery” (44.1%), “symptoms after surgery” (27.0%), and “appearance” (26.3%). Our machine learning approach generated the 10 most common pre- and postoperative questions about mentoplasty. The majority of preoperative questions dealt with potential surgical indications, while most postoperative questions principally addressed appearance.

Conclusions

The majority of mentoplasty patient questions were preoperative and asked about eligibility of surgery. Our study also found a significant proportion of postoperative questions inquired about revision, suggesting a small but nontrivial subset of patients highly dissatisfied with their results. Our 10 most common preoperative and postoperative question handout can help better inform physicians about the patient perspective on mentoplasty throughout their surgical course.

Level of Evidence V 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.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Oscimar Sofia B et al (2018) Mentoplasty for the treatment of chin deformities. Inter J Otorhinolaryngology 5(1):4

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2020 Plastic Surgery Statistics Report (2020) September 14, 2021. Available from: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2020/plastic-surgery-statistics-report-2020.pdf

  3. Harris WC, Raggio BS (2020) Facial Chin Augmentation

  4. Schwitzer JA et al. () Assessing patient-reported outcomes following orthognathic surgery and osseous genioplasty. J Craniofacial Surg 26(8)

  5. White JB, Dufresne CR (2011) Management and avoidance of complications in chin augmentation. Aesthetic Surg J 31(6):634–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ching S et al (2003) Measuring outcomes in aesthetic surgery: a comprehensive review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg 111(1):469–482

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sykes JM (2009) Managing the psychological aspects of plastic surgery patients. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 17(4):321–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Motosko CC et al (2018) Googling aesthetic plastic surgery for patient insights into the latest Trends. Plast Reconstr Surg 142(6):1478–1485

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fan KL et al (2019) The public’s preferences on plastic surgery social media engagement and professionalism: demystifying the impact of demographics. Plast Reconstr Surg 143(2):619–630

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Furnas HJ (2019) Discussion: the public’s preferences on plastic surgery social media engagement and professionalism: demystifying the impact of demographics. Plast Reconstr Surg 143(2):631–632

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sanati-Mehrizy P et al (2020) The “RealSelf Effect”: Can patient reviews on social media impact clinic volume? Ann Plast Surg 85(4):352–357

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Khansa I, Khansa L, Pearson GD (2016) Patient Satisfaction After Rhinoplasty: A Social Media Analysis. Aesth Surg J 36(1):NP1-NP5

  13. Tseng CC et al. (2021) Characterizing patient questions before and after rhinoplasty on social media: a big data approach. Aesthetic Plast Surg, pp 1-8

  14. Domanski MC, Cavale N (2012) Self-reported “worth it” rating of aesthetic surgery in social media. Aesthetic Plast Surg 36(6):1292–1295

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tseng CC et al. (2021) Machine learning approach to analyzing patient questions about facial feminization. Aesthetic Surg J

  16. Hockney SM et al (2018) Identifying drivers of plastic surgeons’ online ratings in abdominoplasty. Plastic Reconst Surg Global Open 6(9S):228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Husain S et al (2021) Nonsurgical rhinoplasty: a realself social media analysis. Am J Cosmetic Surg 38(2):86–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Rohrich RJ, Weinstein AG (2012) Connect with plastic surgery: social media for good. Plast Reconstr Surg 129(3):789–792

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vardanian AJ et al (2013) Social media use and impact on plastic surgery practice. Plast Reconstr Surg 131(5):1184–1193

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Clapham PJ, Pushman AG, Chung KC (2010) A systematic review of applying patient satisfaction outcomes in plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 125(6):1826–1833

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Fottler MD, Ford RC, Bach SA (1997) Measuring patient satisfaction in healthcare organizations: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Best Pract Benchmarking Healthc 2(6):227–239

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chung KC et al (1999) Predictors of patient satisfaction in an outpatient plastic surgery clinic. Ann Plast Surg 42(1):56–60

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Black E et al (2009) An analysis of healthcare providers’ online ratings. Journal of Innovation in Health Informatics 17(4):249–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lau GT, Ng S (2009) Individual and Situational Factors Influencing Negative Word-of-Mouth Behaviour. Can J Admin Sci Revue 18(3):163–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lim S, Tucker CS, Kumara S (2017) An unsupervised machine learning model for discovering latent infectious diseases using social media data. J Biomed Inform 66:82–94

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Andy AU et al. (2021) Predicting cardiovascular risk using social media data: performance evaluation of machine-learning models. JMIR Cardio 5(1):e24473

  27. Mantelakis A et al. (2021) Machine learning demonstrates high accuracy for disease diagnosis and prognosis in plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 9(6):e3638

  28. McCullough M et al (2021) Convolutional neural network models for automatic preoperative severity assessment in unilateral cleft lip. Plast Reconstr Surg 148(1):162–169

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Najjaran Toussi H, Shareh H (2019) Changes in the indices of body image concern, sexual self-esteem and sexual body image in females undergoing cosmetic rhinoplasty: a single-group trial. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 43(3):771-779

  30. Othman S et al. (2020) The influence of photo editing applications on patients seeking facial plastic surgery services. Aesthetic Surg J 41(3):NP101-NP110

  31. Montemurro P et al (2015) The influence of social media and easily accessible online information on the aesthetic plastic surgery practice: literature review and our own experience. Aesthetic Plast Surg 39(2):270–277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Dorfman RG et al (2017) Plastic surgery-related hashtag utilization on instagram: implications for education and marketing. Aesthetic Surg J 38(3):332–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Shah A et al (2017) Public perception of cosmetic surgeons versus plastic surgeons: Increasing transparency to educate patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 139(2):544e–557e

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Chang EW et al (2001) Sliding genioplasty for correction of chin abnormalities. Arch Facial Plast Surg 3(1):8–15

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Guyuron B, Raszewski RL (1990) A critical comparison of osteoplastic and alloplastic augmentation genioplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 14(3):199–206

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Aynehchi BB et al (2012) Vertical incision intraoral silicone chin augmentation. Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery 146(4):553–559

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Keyhan SO et al (2013) Zigzag genioplasty; patients evaluation, technique modifications and review of the literature. The Am J Cosmetic Surg 30(2):80–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Alokozai A et al (2019) Cost in hand surgery: the patient perspective. J Hand Surg 44(11):992.e1-992.e26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Placona AM, Rathert C (2021) Are online patient reviews associated with health care outcomes? A systematic review of the literature. Med Care Res Rev, p 10775587211014534

  40. Parmeshwar N et al (2018) Evaluation of information sources in plastic surgery decision-making. Cureus, 10(6)

  41. Chawla S et al. (2021) Entering the misinformation age: quality and reliability of youtube for patient information on liposuction. Plastic Surg, p 22925503211064382

  42. Alwani MM et al (2020) Evaluation of the quality of printed online education materials in cosmetic facial plastic surgery. Facial Plastic Surg Aesthetic medicine 22(4):255–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lo Torto F et al (2020) Quality assessment of online information on body contouring surgery in postbariatric patient. Aesthetic Plast Surg 44(3):839–846

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Addar A et al (2017) Assessment of “YouTube” content for distal radius fracture immobilization. J Surg Educ 74(5):799–804

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Iglesias-Puzas Á, Conde-Taboada A, López-Bran E (2021) A cross-sectional study of YouTube videos on Mohs surgery: Quality of content and sentiment analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol

  46. Harden C, Stephen W (2013) Six things every plastic surgeon needs to know about teamwork training and checklists. Aesthetic Surg J, p 443-448

  47. Hepner DL et al (2004) Patient satisfaction with preoperative assessment in a preoperative assessment testing clinic. Anesth Analg 98(4):1099–1105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors received no funding for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, 90 Bergen St., Suite 8100, Newark, NJ, 07103, USA

    Rushi Patel, Christopher C. Tseng, Hannaan S. Choudhry, Mehdi S. Lemdani, Guy Talmor & Boris Paskhover

Authors
  1. Rushi Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christopher C. Tseng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hannaan S. Choudhry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mehdi S. Lemdani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Guy Talmor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Boris Paskhover
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Boris Paskhover.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human or animals participants

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 13 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Patel, R., Tseng, C.C., Choudhry, H.S. et al. Applying Machine Learning to Determine Popular Patient Questions About Mentoplasty on Social Media. Aesth Plast Surg 46, 2273–2279 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-02808-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-02808-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation