Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between preoperative patient expectation and postoperative patient expectation coverage rates and patient satisfaction.
Methods
183 patients who underwent SRP for various reasons were divided into 6 groups according to surgical indication and the postoperative Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation Scale (ROE). The groups were evaluated in terms of preoperative expectation levels and postoperative expectation coverage rate.
Results
When the patients were evaluated in terms of preoperative expectation levels, a significant difference was determined between the patients who underwent surgery for cosmetic reasons (86.15 ± 8.61) and those with functional reasons (79.24 ± 6.62) (p < 0.001). Similarly, the lowest patient expectation coverage rates were in the patient group with cosmetic reasons for the operation. When patients were grouped according to the ROE scores in the postoperative period and surgical indication, expectation was higher in the groups that were not satisfied with the results (Groups 2, 4 and 6). The highest expectation levels among the groups were seen in the dissatisfied patients who had undergone surgery for cosmetic reasons (92.17 ± 4.96). A strong positive correlation was found between expectation coverage rates and patient satisfaction (r 0.907, p < 0.001).
Conclusion
Determination and rationalization of the expectations of patients in the preoperative period is one of the factors that will increase the satisfaction of the patients about the surgical procedure.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Radulesco T, Penicaud M, Santini L, Thomassin JM, Dessi P, Michel J (2018) Outcomes of septorhinoplasty: a new approach comparing functional and aesthetic results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 47:175–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2017.09.002 (Epub 2017 Sep 28)
Başer E, Kocagöz GD, Çalim ÖF, Verim A, Yilmaz F, Özturan O (2016) Assessment of patient satisfaction with evaluation methods in open technique septorhinoplasty. J Craniofac Surg 27:420–424. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000002321
Sena Esteves S, Gonçalves Ferreira M, Carvalho Almeida J, Abrunhosa J, Almeida E, Sousa C (2017) Evaluation of aesthetic and functional outcomes in rhinoplasty surgery: a prospective study. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 83:552–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjorl.2016.06.010
Saleh AM, Younes A, Friedman O (2012) Cosmetics and function: quality-of life changes after rhinoplasty surgery. Laryngoscope 122:254–259
Izu SC, Kosugi EM, Brandão KV, Lopes AS, Garcia LB, Suguri VM, Gregório LC (2012) Normal values for the rhinoplasty outcome evaluation (ROE) questionnaire. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 78:76–79
Bulut OC, Wallner F, Hohenberger R, Plinkert PK, Baumann I (2015) Quality of life after septorhinoplasty measured with the functional rhinoplasty outcome inventory 17 (FROI-17). Rhinology 53:54–58
Alsarraf R (2000) Outcomes research in facial plastic surgery: a review and new directions. Aesthetic Plast Surg 24:192–197
Oladokun D, Baumgart A, Baumann I, Bulut OC (2018) Quality of life gain after septorhinoplasty: an analysis of health utility and cost utility values associated with septorhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 42:1618–1624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-018-1226-7
Stewart MG, Witsell DL, Smith TL, Weaver EM, Yueh B, Hannley MT (2004) Development and validation of the nasal obstruction symptom evaluation (NOSE) scale. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 130:57–163
Bulut OC, Wallner F, Hohenberger R, Plinkert PK, Baumann I (2017) Quality of life after primary septorhinoplasty in deviated- and non-deviated nose measured with ROE, FROI-17 and SF-36. Rhinology 55(1):75–80. https://doi.org/10.4193/Rhin16.243
Morselli PG, Boriani F (2012) Should plastic surgeons operate on patients diagnosed with body dysmorphic disorders? Plast Reconstr Surg 130(4):620e–622e. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e318262f65b
Ramos TD, Brito MJ, Piccolo MS, Rosella MF, Neto SM, Ferreira LM (2016) Body dysmorphic symptoms scale for patients seeking esthetic surgery: cross-cultural validation study. Sao Paulo Med J 134(6):480–490. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-3180.2016.0068160416
Mr F, Tabrizi AG, Bafghi AF, Sa N, A M (2013) Body dysmorphic disorder in aesthetic rhinoplasty candidates. Pak J Med Sci 29(1):197–200. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.291.2733
de Brito MJ, de Almeida Arruda Felix G, Nahas FX, Tavares H, Cordás TA, Dini GM, Ferreira LM (2015) Body dysmorphic disorder should not be considered an exclusion criterion for cosmetic surgery. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 68(2):270–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2014.09.046
Hilberg O, Pedersen OF (2000) Acoustic rhinometry recommendations for technical specifications and standard operating procedures. Rhinol Suppl 16:3–17
Litner JA, Rotenberg BW, Dennis M, Adamson PA (2008) Impact of cosmetic facial surgery on satisfactions with appearance and quality of life. Arch Facial Plast Surg 10:79–83
Arima LM, Velasco LC, Tiago RS (2011) Crooked nose: outcome evaluations in rhinoplasty. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 77:510–515
Balikci HH, Gurdal MM (2014) Satisfaction outcomes in open functional septorhinoplasty: prospective analysis. J Craniofac Surg 25:377–379. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000000638
Hellings PW, Trenite´ GJN. (2007) Long-term patient satisfaction after revision rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 117:985Y989
Claes G, Claes J, Wuyts FL (2009) Outcome of septorhinoplasty: a comparison of patient and surgeon views. B-ENT 5:203–211
Funding
Thisresearchdid not receiveanyspecificgrantfromfundingagencies in thepublic, commercial, or not-for-profitsectors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Each author’s contribution to the manuscript. Conceptualization, data curation, formalanalysis, funding acquisition, methodology, visualization, writing—original draft: MA, MM.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflict of interests to declare.
Ethics committee approval
The study was conducted in accordance with the principles stated in the Declaration of Helsinki.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Avcu, M., Metin, M. Evaluation of the relationship between patient expectation, patient expectation coverage rates and patient satisfaction in open primary septorhinoplasty surgery: a prospective randomized study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 278, 2337–2346 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-020-06502-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-020-06502-w