Obesity Surgery

, Volume 22, Issue 10, pp 1527–1534 | Cite as

Satisfaction and Quality-of-Life Issues in Body Contouring Surgery Patients: a Qualitative Study

  • Anne F. Klassen
  • Stefan J. Cano
  • Amie Scott
  • Jessica Johnson
  • Andrea L. Pusic
Clinical Research



Body contouring, which encompasses a range of surgical procedures on different areas of the body, is one of the most rapidly growing areas of plastic surgery. Little is known about outcomes from the perspective of post-weight loss body contouring patients. The aim of our qualitative study was to identify the health and aesthetic concerns of such patients through in-depth patient interviews.


Forty-three bariatric surgery post-weight loss body contouring patients were recruited between September 2009 and January 2011 from the offices of five plastic surgeons located in the USA and Canada. Interviews were used to explore the impact that obesity, weight loss, and body contouring surgery had on all aspects of the patient’s life. Interviews were transcribed and data analysis involved coding and the use of the constant comparison method to develop categories and themes. Interviewing continued until no new themes emerged.


Patients described a range of important health and aesthetic concerns related to body contouring surgery following massive weight loss, including the following: appearance-related concerns, physical health concerns, sexual health concerns, psychological health concerns, and social health concerns. Body contouring surgery played an instrumental role in the completion of the entire weight loss process for patients.


The removal of excess skin leads to improvements in a patient’s appearance and enhanced physical, psychological, and social health and well-being. In order to appropriately measure the impact of body contouring procedures from the patient’s perspective, a well-developed psychometrically sound patient-reported outcome instrument is needed.


Cosmetic surgery Aesthetic surgery Body contouring Outcomes Quality of life Patient satisfaction Qualitative 



All contributing authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest. This study was funded by a grant from the Plastic Surgery Education Foundation.


  1. 1.
    Heddens CJ. Body contouring after massive weight loss. Plast Surg Nurs. 2004;24:107–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pecori L, Serra Cervetti GG, Marinari GM, et al. Attitudes of morbidly obese patients to weight loss and body image following bariatric surgery and body contouring. Obes Surg. 2007;17:68–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Song AY, Rubin JP, Thomas V, et al. Body image and quality of life in post massive weight loss body contouring patients. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2006;14:1626–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sarwer DB, Fabricatore AN. Psychiatric Considerations of the Massive Weight Loss Patient. Clin Plast Surg. 2008;35:10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hensel JM, Lehman Jr JA, Tantri MP, et al. An outcomes analysis and satisfaction survey of 199 consecutive abdominoplasties. Ann Plast Surg. 2001;46:357–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hurwitz DJ, Agha-Mohammadi S. Postbariatric surgery breast reshaping: the spiral flap. Ann Plast Surg. 2006;56:481–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hurwitz DJ, Holland SW. The L brachioplasty: An innovative approach to correct excess tissue of the upper arm, axilla, and lateral chest. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;117:403–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Migliori F, Rosati C, D'Alessandro G, et al. Body contouring after biliopancreatic diversion. Obes Surg. 2006;16:1638–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    van Huizum MA, Roche NA, Hofer SO. Circular belt lipectomy: a retrospective follow-up study on perioperative complications and cosmetic outcome. Ann Plast Surg. 2005;54:459–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Young SC, Freiberg A. A critical look at abdominal lipectomy following morbid obesity surgery. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1991;15:81–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yousif NJ, Lifchez SD, Nguyen HH. Transverse rectus sheath plication in abdominoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;114:778–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cano S, Klassen A, Pusic A. The science behind quality-of-life measurement: a primer for plastic surgeons. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;123:98e–106e.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Patient reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. 2009. Available at:
  14. 14.
    Reavey P, Klassen AF, Cano SJ, et al. Measuring quality of life and patient satisfaction after body contouring: a systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures. Aesthet Surg J. 2011;7:807–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Augustin M, Zschocke I, Sommer B, et al. Sociodemographic profile and satisfaction with treatment of patients undergoing liposuction in tumescent anesthesia. Dermatol Surg. 1999;25:4.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Harris DL, Carr AT. The Derriford Appearance Scale (DAS59): a new psychometric scale for the evaluation of patients with disfigurements and aesthetic problems of appearance. Br J Plast Surg. 2001;54:216–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Carr T, Harris D, James C. The Derriford Appearance Scale (DAS-59): A new scale to measure individual responses to living with problems of appearance. Br J Health Psychol. 2000;5:201–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Carr T, Moss T, Harris D. The DAS 24: A short form of the Derriford Appearance Scale DAS59 to measure individual responses to living with problems of appearance. Br J Health Psychol. 2005;10:14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sigurdson L, Kirkland SA, Mykhalovskiy E. Validation of a questionnaire for measuring morbidity in breast hypertrophy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;120:1108–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kerrigan CL, Collins ED, Striplin D, et al. The health burden of breast hypertrophy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;108:1591–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM, et al. Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: The BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:345–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cano SJ, Klassen AF, Scott AM, et al. The BREAST-Q: Further validation in independent clinical samples. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129:293–302.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. Assessing health status and quality of life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res. 2002;11:193–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lasch KE, Marquis P, Vigneuz M, et al. PRO development: rigorous qualitative research as crucial foundation. Qual Life Res. 2010;19:1087–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Qualitative Solutions Research International. NVivo 8 [Software]. Australia: QSR International; 2008.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Picot J, Jones J, Colquitt JL et al. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bariatric (weight loss) surgery for obesity: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2009;13:1–190, 215–357, iii‐iv. Review.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    van der Beek ESJ, te Riele W, Specken TF, et al. The impact of reconstructive procedures following bariatric surgery on patient well-being and quality of life. Obes Surg. 2010;20:36–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Duval K, Marceau P, Perusse L, et al. An overview of obesity-specific quality of life questionnaires. Obes Rev. 2006;7:347–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Scott AM, Pusic AL, Cano SJ, et al. The BODY-Q: A new patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure for body contouring patients. Qual Life Res. 2012;20:74–75.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne F. Klassen
    • 1
  • Stefan J. Cano
    • 2
  • Amie Scott
    • 3
  • Jessica Johnson
    • 4
  • Andrea L. Pusic
    • 3
  1. 1.McMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  2. 2.Peninsula College of Medicine and DentistryPlymouthUK
  3. 3.Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA
  4. 4.McMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada

Personalised recommendations