Skip to main content

Satisfaction in rhinoplasty: the possible impact of anxiety and functional outcome

Abstract

Background

Rhinoplasty is a complex but commonly applied surgical procedure. Patient satisfaction is the least discussed but one of the most important determinants of surgical success.

Objectives

Evaluation of the patient satisfaction together with surgeon satisfaction were the main goals of this study. The roles of anxiety, gender, age and follow-up period were also studied.

Patients and methods

53 eligible patients operated by the first two authors within the previous 2 years were enrolled in the study. The medical records were reviewed for demographic data as well as the details of the surgical procedure. Functional and esthetic satisfactions of the patients were evaluated by VAS and ROE respectively. Surgeon satisfaction was evaluated by VAS in crosswise manner. Anxiety was measured by STAI_s and STAI_t scales.

Results

The analysis concerning esthetic results as well as functional results did not reveal any significant difference between the two surgeons (p = 0.132, p = 0.43 respectively). ROE scores were significantly different among patients with “good” and “very good” functional results. The difference between surgeon satisfaction and patient satisfaction was found to be insignificant (p = 0.273). Correlation analysis yielded a positive correlation between STAI_I and STAI_II (Pearson r = 0.335, p = 0.014) but not between STAI scores and ROE scores. Moreover, there was no relation between anxiety scores and the functional results. Likely, gender as well as age, follow-up, and surgical technique were not found to have any effect on patient satisfaction either.

Conclusion

Patient satisfaction is preferential in rhinoplasty. In our patient series, patient satisfaction was shown to be correlated with functional outcome but not with surgeon satisfaction. Anxiety was not found to have a significant impact on results of rhinoplasty. Our results should be interpreted cautiously keeping in mind that our patients’ primary drive for rhinoplasty was functional.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Ishii LE, Tollefson TT, Basura GJ et al (2017) Clinical practice guideline: improving nasal form and function after rhinoplasty. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 156:S1–S30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Floyd EM, Ho S, Patel P, Rosenfeld RM, Gordin E (2017) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating functional rhinoplasty outcomes with the NOSE score. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 156:809–815

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Zojaji R, Keshavarzmanesh M, Arshadi HR, Baf MMF, Esmaeilzadeh S (2014) Quality of life in patients who underwent rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 30:593–596

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chan A-W, Hróbjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG (2004) Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA 291:2457–2465

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. de Brito MJA, Nahas FX, Cordás TA, Tavares H, Ferreira LM (2016) Body dysmorphic disorder in patients seeking abdominoplasty, rhinoplasty, and rhytidectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 137:462–471

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Herruer JM, Prins JB, van Heerbeek N, Verhage-Damen GW, Ingels KJ (2015) Negative predictors for satisfaction in patients seeking facial cosmetic surgery: a systematic review. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:1596–1605

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Naraghi M, Atari M (2016) Development and validation of the Expectations of Aesthetic Rhinoplasty Scale. Arch Plast Surg 43:365–370

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mantar A, Yemez B, Alkin T (2010) The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the anxiety sensitivity index-3. Turk Psikiyatri Dergisi 21:1

    Google Scholar 

  12. Honigman RJ, Phillips KA, Castle DJ (2004) A review of psychosocial outcomes for patients seeking cosmetic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 113:1229

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Klassen AF, Cano SJ, East CA et al (2016) Development and psychometric evaluation of the FACE-Q scales for patients undergoing rhinoplasty. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 18:27–35

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Lohuis PJ, Hakim S, Duivesteijn W, Knobbe A, Tasman A-J (2013) Benefits of a short, practical questionnaire to measure subjective perception of nasal appearance after aesthetic rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:913e–923e

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Arima LM, Velasco LC, Tiago RSL (2011) Crooked nose: outcome evaluations in rhinoplasty. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 77:510–515

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Constantian MB, Martin JP (2015) Why can’t more good surgeons learn rhinoplasty? Oxford University Press, England

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Serap Koybasi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

In this study we ensure that there is no conflict of interest.

Human participants

The research involved only human participants.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from each participant.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Koybasi, S., Bicer, Y.O., Seyhan, S. et al. Satisfaction in rhinoplasty: the possible impact of anxiety and functional outcome. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 275, 729–733 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-017-4860-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-017-4860-9

Keywords

  • Rhinoplasty
  • Satisfaction
  • Anxiety