Welche Qualität macht den Unterschied?

Zusammenfassung

In kaum einem anderen Bereich ist das Ergebnis so offensichtlich, wie bei der plastisch-ästhetischen Nasenchirurgie. Umsomehr spielen sowohl die Qualität des Eingriffs und im Bereich der Ästhetik die Qualität des Ergebnisses eine herausragende Rolle. Hierbei sind die Erwartungen und der Anspruch des Operateurs nicht immer deckungsgleich mit der des Patienten. Des Weiteren haben Kostenträger, im Falle von Kombinationsoperationen, einen eigenen Fokus zum Thema Qualität, der häufig mit Wirtschaftlichkeit verwechselt wird. Objektive Kriterien spielen für den Arzt eine wesentliche Rolle, wobei für die Patienten sehr häufig weiche Kriterien von wesentlicher Bedeutung sind. Dies ist umso diffiziler, da Schönheit im Auge des Betrachters liegt und mit funktionellen Kriterien, wie Atmung und Riechen vereinbar sein müssen. In der Vielzahl von Qualitätskriterien fällt es dem Laien schwer die richtige Arztwahl zu treffen, insbesondere angesichts unzähliger Siegel, Zertifkate und des Einflusses des Internets bzw. von Social Media. Aber auch der Chirurg muss aus einer Vielzahl von Kongressen, Kursen und Symposien herausfinden, welche dieser Veranstaltungen eine bestimmte Mindestqualität garantiert. Trotz einer enormen Veränderung und Verfeinerung der rhinochirurgischen OP-Techniken im Rahmen der letzten Jahrzehnte, wird die Ergebnisqualität seitens der Patienten konstant vor die Prozedurqualität gestellt. Dieses Referat versucht eine Standortbestimmung möglichst objektivierbarer Qualitätsindikatoren in Kombination mit unterschiedlichen Anforderungen und Standpunkten zum Thema Qualität – aus Sicht des Arztes, des Patienten und des Kostenträgers – zu beleuchten und diese im Spiegel sich verändernder OP-Techniken der plastisch-ästhetischen Nasenchirurgie zu betrachten.

Abstract

There may be no field in which outcome is more obvious than in cosmetic nasal surgery. Both the quality of the procedure and the cosmetic quality of the result play an outstanding role in the arena of cosmetics. The expectations and interests of the surgeon are not always the same as those of the patient. Furthermore, with combination surgery, cost bearers focus independently on quality. This is often wrongly confused with economy. Objective criteria play a crucial role for the physician, but soft criteria are very important for patients. This is much more difficult, as everyone knows that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and must be compatible with functions such as breathing and smelling. There are many different quality standards, so that it is difficult for the patient to choose the right physician, particularly if he has to bear in mind the countless seals and certificates, and the influence of the internet and social media. But even the surgeon has to sift through a large number of congresses, courses, and symposia, if he is to achieve a minimum level of quality. Even though rhinosurgical techniques have greatly improved in recent decades, the patient always regards the quality of the outcome as being more important than the quality of the process. This paper presents a status report on the most objective quality indicators for cosmetic nasal surgery, as seen through the eyes of physicians, patients, and cost bearers, and in the context of changing surgical techniques.

Schlüsselwörter

Nasenchirurgie - Rhinoplastik - Qualität - plastisch-ästhetische Chirurgie

• Literatur

• 1 Parsa-Parsi RW. The Revised Declaration of Geneva: A Modern-Day Physician's Pledge. JAMA 2017; 318: 1971-1972. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.16230
• 2 Medizin ÄZfQid. Gemeinsame Stellungnahme von BÄK und KBV zur Qualitätsverbesserung im Gesundheitswesen. In: Deutschland: 1998
• 3 Institute of Medicine (U.S.) . Division of Health Care Services., Lohr KN, Institute of Medicine (U.S.). Committee to Design a Strategy for Quality Review and Assurance in Medicare. et al. Medicare : a strategy for quality assurance. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press; 1990
• 4 Cassier-Woidasky AK. What do people expect from their hospital? Results of a visitor survey at open house in a general hospital. Pflege 1998; 11: 248-254
• 5 Höhmann UM-M, Schulz G, Qualität B. durch Kooperation – Gesundheitsdienste in der Vernetzung In: Pflege. Frankfurt: Mabuse; 1997: 248-254
• 6 Schmidt C, Moller J, Reibe F. et al. Patient satisfaction with inpatient care. Evaluation, methods and special features. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2003; 128: 619-624. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-38055
• 7 Nolting HdW. J. Der Patient vor der Wahl. Durch mehr Wissen zu mehr Verantwortung. Ergebnisse der Janssen-Cilag Bevölkerungsbefragung 2002. Neuss: Eigenverlag Janssen-Cilag; 2002
• 8 Stock S, Hertle D, Veit C. Patient-centredness and Quality of Care in Germany in International Comparison - Results of a Telephone Survey of Patients in 11 Countries. Gesundheitswesen 2015; 77: 761-767. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1387757
• 9 Gaydoul T. Qualitätsberichte von Krankenhäusern: eine empirische Analyse aus informationsökonomischer Sicht. Wiesbaden: Gabler Zugl.: Hohenheim; 2009. 256 S.
• 10 Klemperer D. Wie Ärzte und Patienten Entscheidungen treffen. Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB); 2003
• 11 Dierks M-L. Bürger- und Patientenorientierung im Gesundheitswesen. Berlin: Robert Koch-Institut; 2006
• 12 Kidd J, Patel V, Peile E. et al. Clinical and communication skills. BMJ 2005; 330: 374-375. doi: 10.1136/bmj.330.7488.374
• 13 Little P, Dorward M, Warner G. et al. Importance of patient pressure and perceived pressure and perceived medical need for investigations, referral, and prescribing in primary care: nested observational study. BMJ 2004; 328: 444. 10.1136/bmj.38013.644086.7C
• 14 Kahrs MS. T Medizinische Versorgung und Patientenbedürfnisse. Berlin: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag; 2003
• 15 Harter M. Shared decision making – from the point of view of patients, physicians and health politics is set in place. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich 2004; 98: 89-92
• 16 Dierks M-L. Patientensouveränität: der autonome Patient im Mittelpunkt. Stuttgart: Akad. für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Baden-Württemberg; 2001
• 17 [Anonym] . Guide to Quality Assurance. In Chicago, USA: Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO). 1998
• 18 Van der Stuyft P, Unger JP. Improving the performance of health systems: the World Health Report as go-between for scientific evidence and ideological discourse. Trop Med Int Health 2000; 5: 675-677
• 19 al. GMJWTCALe . Qualitätsindikatoren in Deutschland. Positionspapier des Expertenkreises Qualitätsindikatoren beim Ärztlichen Zentrum für Qualität in der Medizin (ÄZQ), Berlin. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich 2005; 99: 329-331
• 20 Geraedts M, Selbmann HK, Ollenschlager G. Assessment of methodological quality of clinical performance measures. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich 2002; 96: 91-96
• 21 Wölker T. Qualitätsmanagement in der Arztpraxis – So managen Sie Qualität. Neu-Isenburg: Ärzte-Zeitung-Verl; -Ges. 2002
• 22 Medizin ÄZfQid . Woran erkennt man eine gute Arztpraxis? - Checkliste für Patientinnen und Patienten. 4. Aufl. Aufl. Berlin: ÄZQ; 2015
• 23 Blanke BK. H Die Ökonomisierung der Gesundheitspolitik: Von der Globalsteuerung zum Wettbewerbskonzept im Gesundheitswesen. Leviathan 1996; 24: 512-538
• 24 Shulman LN, Palis BE, McCabe R. et al. Survival As a Quality Metric of Cancer Care: Use of the National Cancer Data Base to Assess Hospital Performance. J Oncol Pract 2018; 14: e59-e72. 10.1200/JOP.2016.020446
• 25 Helou A, Schwartz FW, Ollenschlager G. Qualitätsmanagement und Qualitätssicherung in Deutschland. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2002; 45: 205-214. 10.1007/s00103-001-0372-1
• 26 Herholz H. Qualitätssicherung und Qualitätsmanagement in der ambulanten Versorgung am Beispiel Hessen. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2002; 45: 249-259. 10.1007/s00103-002-0379-2
• 27 Schillinger D, Piette J, Grumbach K. et al. Closing the loop: physician communication with diabetic patients who have low health literacy. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163: 83-90 doi 10.1001/archinte.163.1.83
• 28 Ortmann K. Discrepancies between physicians and patients with long-term functional somatoform disorders as a central treatment problem. How the quality of assistance can be improved. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich 2000; 94: 708-712
• 29 Hoffrage U, Kurzenhauser S, Gigerenzer G. How can one improve the understanding and communication of the importance of medical test results?. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich 2000; 94: 713-719
• 30 [Anonym] . Hausärztliche Gesprächsführung. Hausärztliche Leitlinie. In: Leitliniengruppe Hessen. Köln: PMV Forschungsgruppe; 2006
• 31 Schulz von Thun F. Miteinander reden. 14. Aufl. Reinbek: Rowohlt; 1998
• 32 Ollenschlager G, Marshall C, Qureshi S. et al. Improving the quality of health care: using international collaboration to inform guideline programmes by founding the Guidelines International Network (G-I-N). Qual Saf Health Care 2004; 13: 455-460. doi: 10.1136/qhc.13.6.455
• 33 Kirchner H, Fiene M, Ollenschlager G. Dissemination and implementation of guidelines in public health: current state in July 2001. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2001; 126: 1215-1220. doi: 10.1055/s-2001-18003
• 34 Lelgemann M, Ollenschlager G. Evidence based guidelines and clinical pathways: complementation or contradiction?. Internist (Berl) 2006; 47 690 692-697. doi: 10.1007/s00108-006-1652-5
• 35 Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G. et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess 2004; 8 iii-iv 1-72
• 36 Encke AKI, Selbmann HK, Hoppe D. et al. Das Deutsche Instrument zur methodischen Leitlinien-Bewertung (DELBI). Dtsch Arztebl 2005; 102: 1912-1913 1
• 37 Kirchner HO. G Implementierung von Leitlinien. Netze auf dem Weg zur evidenzbasierten Medizin. In Tophoven CL. L Hrsg Integrierte Versorgung. Köln: Dt. Ärzte-Verl; 2002: 63-106
• 38 Bundesvereinigung BK. . Beurteilungskriterien für Leitlinien in der medizinischen Versorgung – Beschlüsse der Vorstände der Bundesärztekammer und Kassenärztlicher Bundesvereinigung. Dtsch Ärztebl 1997; 94: A2154-A2155
• 39 Schubert IL, Kirchner M, von Ferber HC et al. Handbuch zur Entwicklung regionaler Leitlinien. Norderstedt: BoD, Books on Demand 2006
• 40 Kirchner HS, Weingart S, Ollenschläger O. G Methoden und Techniken der Evidenzbasierten Medizin. In: Handbuch Qualitätszirkel. Köln: Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung; 2003
• 41 Fessler J, Gross J, Papendick H. et al. Qualitative and economc impact of implementing GP guidelines in a medical practitioners’ network. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich 2006; 100: 107-112
• 42 Pizzi LTG. N Promoting a Culture of Safety. Making Health Care Safer: A Critical Analysis of Patient Safety Practices. Evidence. In: (AHRQ) AfHRaQ. Hrsg Evidence Report/Technology Assessment; Rockville: Ed Nash DB. 2001
• 43 Rosenthal J, Riley T. National Academy for State Health Policy (U.S.) et al. Patient safety and medical errors: a road map for state action. Portland, ME: National Academy for State Health Policy; 2001
• 44 Schwitzer JA, Albino FP, Mathis RK. et al. Assessing Demographic Differences in Patient-Perceived Improvement in Facial Appearance and Quality of Life Following Rhinoplasty. Aesthetic surgery journal 2015; 35: 784-793 doi: 10.1093/asj/sjv066
• 45 Bitzer EMD. ML Wie kann man Erwartungen und Zufriedenheit der Patienten im Qualitätsmanagement berücksichtigen? – Erhebungsverfahren und Erfahrungen aus der ambulanten Versorgung. In Gesundheit DBf, Hrsg. Qualitätsmanagement in der Arztpraxis. Baden-Baden: Nomos; 1999: 125-184
• 46 Oladokun D, Baumgart A, Baumann I. et al. Quality of Life Gain After Septorhinoplasty: An Analysis of Health Utility and Cost Utility Values Associated with Septorhinoplasty. Aesthetic plastic surgery 2018; 42: 1618-1624 doi: 10.1007/s00266-018-1226-7
• 47 Luk LJ, Steele TO, Mace JC. et al. Health utility outcomes in patients undergoing medical management for chronic rhinosinusitis: a prospective multiinstitutional study. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 2015; 5: 1018-1027. doi: 10.1002/alr.21588
• 48 Barton GR, Bankart J, Davis AC. et al. Comparing utility scores before and after hearing-aid provision: results according to the EQ-5D, HUI3 and SF-6D. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2004; 3: 103-105. txt: 10.2165/00148365-200403020-00006
• 49 Arnoldner C, Lin VY, Honeder C. et al. Ten-year health-related quality of life in cochlear implant recipients: prospective SF-36 data with SF-6D conversion. The Laryngoscope 2014; 124: 278-282. doi: 10.1002/lary.24387
• 50 Feeny D, Wu L, Eng K. Comparing short form 6D, standard gamble, and Health Utilities Index Mark 2 and Mark 3 utility scores: results from total hip arthroplasty patients. Quality of life research: an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation 2004; 13: 1659-1670. doi: 10.1007/s11136-004-6189-2
• 51 Biggs TC, Fraser LR, Ward MJ. et al. Patient reported outcome measures in septorhinoplasty surgery. Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England 2015; 97: 63-65. doi: 10.1308/003588414x14055925059075
• 52 Black W. An arithmetical and medical analysis of the diseases and mortality of the human species By. William Black MD. . In The second edition corrected and improved. ed. London: printed for the author by John Crowder: and sold by C. Dilly; 1789. 12 ,ix, 11 ,265, 261 p., 262 leaves of plates
• 53 Trohler U. „To improve the evidence of medicine“: arithmetic observation in clinical medicine in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Hist Philos Life Sci 1988; 10 Suppl 31-40
• 54 Kunz R, Cox M. Lehrbuch evidenzbasierte Medizin in Klinik und Praxis. mit 85 Tabellen. 2., überarb. und erw. Aufl. Aufl. Köln: Dt. Ärzte-Verl; 2007
• 55 Beckmann JS, Lew D. Reconciling evidence-based medicine and precision medicine in the era of big data: challenges and opportunities. Genome Med 2016; 8: 134. doi: 10.1186/s13073-016-0388-7
• 56 Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA. et al. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 1996; 312: 71-72. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71
• 57 Karaiskakis P, Bromba M, Dietz A. et al. Reconstruction of nasal tip support in primary, open approach septorhinoplasty: A retrospective analysis between the tongue-in-groove technique and the columellar strut. European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology: official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS): affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology – Head and Neck Surgery 2016; 273: 2555-2560. doi: 10.1007/s00405-016-3911-y
• 58 Ellis J, Mulligan I, Rowe J. et al. Inpatient general medicine is evidence based. A-Team, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine. Lancet 1995; 346: 407-410
• 59 Powell JA, Geddes JR. Evidence-based psychiatry. Br J Psychiatry 1997; 171: 586-587. doi: 10.1192/bjp.171.6.586c
• 60 Gill P, Dowell AC, Neal RD. et al. Evidence based general practice: a retrospective study of interventions in one training practice. BMJ 1996; 312: 819-821. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7034.819
• 61 Dietz A, Wiegand S, Kuhnt T. et al. Laryngeal Preservation Approaches: Considerations for New Selection Criteria Based on the DeLOS-II Trial. Front Oncol 2019; 9: 625. doi:10.3389/fonc.2019.00625
• 62 Sheen JH, Sheen AP. Aesthetic rhinoplasty. St. Louis: C. V. Mosby Co; 1978
• 63 Joseph J. Nasenplastik und sonstige Gesichtsplastik nebst einem Anhang über Mammaplastik und einige weitere Operationen aus dem Gebiete der äusseren Körperplastik: ein Atlas und Lehrbuch. Leipzig: Kabitzsch; 1931
• 64 Cakir B, Oreroglu AR, Dogan T. et al. A complete subperichondrial dissection technique for rhinoplasty with management of the nasal ligaments. Aesthetic surgery journal 2012; 32: 564-574. doi:10.1177/1090820X12445471
• 65 Ozmen S, Eryilmaz T, Sencan A. et al. Sliding alar cartilage (SAC) flap: a new technique for nasal tip surgery. Annals of plastic surgery 2009; 63: 480-485. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e31819538a8
• 66 Gruber RP, Zhang AY, Mohebali K. Preventing alar retraction by preservation of the lateral crus. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2010; 126: 581-588. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181de22d1
• 67 Davis RE. Lateral crural tensioning for refinement of the wide and underprojected nasal tip: rethinking the lateral crural steal. Facial plastic surgery clinics of North America 2015; 23: 23-53. doi: 10.1016/j.fsc.2014.09.003
• 68 Palhazi P, Daniel RK, Kosins AM. The osseocartilaginous vault of the nose: anatomy and surgical observations. Aesthetic surgery journal 2015; 35: 242-251. doi: 10.1093/asj/sju079
• 69 Saban YP, Atlas d’Anatomie R. Chirurgicale de la Face et du Cou. Florence, Italy: SEE Editrice; 2009
• 70 Goodman WS. External approach to rhinoplasty. Can J Otolaryngol 1973; 2: 207-210
• 71 Anderson JR, Ries WR. Rhinoplasty: emphasizing the external approach. New York: Thieme; 1986
• 72 Daniel RK. Rhinoplasty: creating an aesthetic tip. A preliminary report. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 1987; 80: 775-783
• 73 Gunter JP, Rohrich RJ. External approach for secondary rhinoplasty. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 1987; 80: 161-174. doi: 10.1097/00006534-198708000-00001
• 74 Aiach G. Mini-forum: rhinoplasty by external approach. External or endonasal approach for rhinoplasty?. Annales de chirurgie plastique et esthetique 1992; 37: 498-509
• 75 Fritz K. „Open approach“—„progress“ back the beginnings of septorhinoplasty. Hno 2000; 48: 562-567
• 76 Durante BJ, Porubsky ES. Reducing columella scarring in open septorhinoplasty. The Laryngoscope 1986; 96: 810-811
• 77 Friedman GD, Gruber RP. A fresh look at the open rhinoplasty technique. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 1988; 82: 973-982 doi: 10.1097/00006534-198812000-00006
• 78 Yagmur C, Ak S, Engin MS. et al. Columellar Scar Perception in Open Rhinoplasty. Interplay of Scar Awareness, Body Cathexis and Patient Satisfaction. Aesthetic plastic surgery 2017; 41: 153-160. doi: 10.1007/s00266-016-0719-5
• 79 Constantian MB. Differing characteristics in 100 consecutive secondary rhinoplasty patients following closed versus open surgical approaches. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2002; 109: 2097-2111. doi10.1097/00006534-200205000-00048
• 80 Daniel RK, Palhazi P. The Nasal Ligaments and Tip Support in Rhinoplasty: An Anatomical Study. Aesthetic surgery journal 2018; 38: 357-368. doi: 10.1093/asj/sjx192
• 81 Pitanguy I. Surgical Importance of a Dermocartilaginous Ligament in Bulbous Noses. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 1965; 36: 247-253 doi: 10.1097/00006534-196508000-00014
• 82 Toriumi DM, Mueller RA, Grosch T. et al. Vascular anatomy of the nose and the external rhinoplasty approach. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1996; 122: 24-34
• 83 Berghaus A. Modern Rhinoplasty: Is There a Place for the Closed Approach?. Facial plastic surgery: FPS 2016; 32: 402-408. doi: 10.1055/s-0036-1585422
• 84 Gokce Kutuk S, Arikan OK. Evaluation of the effects of open and closed rhinoplasty on the psychosocial stress level and quality of life of rhinoplasty patients. Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS 2019; 72: 1347-1354. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2019.03.020
• 85 Bulut OC, Wallner F, Hohenberger R. et al. Quality of life after primary septorhinoplasty in deviated- and non-deviated nose measured with ROE, FROI-17 and SF-36. Rhinology 2017; 55: 75-80. doi: 10.4193/Rhin16.243
• 86 Saban Y, Daniel RK, Polselli R. et al. Dorsal Preservation: The Push Down Technique Reassessed. Aesthetic surgery journal 2018; 38: 117-131. 10.1093/asj/sjx180
• 87 Daniel RK. The Preservation Rhinoplasty: A New Rhinoplasty Revolution. Aesthetic surgery journal 2018; 38: 228-229. 10.1093/asj/sjx258
• 88 Toriumi DM. Structure rhinoplasty: lessons learned in 30 years. Chicago: DMT Solutions; 2019
• 89 Muhler G. Correction of the nose with autogenic rib cartilage transplantation. Hno 1969; 17: 294-298
• 90 Walter C. Nasal reconstruction. The Laryngoscope 1975; 85: 1227-1240 10.1288/00005537-197507000-00015
• 91 Wee JH, Park MH, Oh S. et al. Complications associated with autologous rib cartilage use in rhinoplasty: a meta-analysis. JAMA facial plastic surgery 2015; 17: 49-55 10.1001/jamafacial.2014.914
• 92 Dingman RO, Grabb WC. Costal cartilage homografts preserved by irradiation. Plast Reconstr Surg Transplant Bull 1961; 28: 562-567
• 93 Kridel RW, Konior RJ. Irradiated cartilage grafts in the nose. A preliminary report. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1993; 119: 24-30. discussion 30-21
• 94 Kridel RW, Ashoori F, Liu ES. et al. Long-term use and follow-up of irradiated homologous costal cartilage grafts in the nose. Archives of facial plastic surgery 2009; 11: 378-394. 10.1001/archfacial.2009.91
• 95 Kridel RW, Sturm AK. Dorsal Augmentation with Homologous Rib. Facial plastic surgery : FPS 2017; 33: 195-201. 10.1055/s-0037-1598031
• 96 Wee JH, Mun SJ, Na WS. et al. Autologous vs. Irradiated Homologous Costal Cartilage as Graft Material in Rhinoplasty. JAMA facial plastic surgery 2017; 19: 183-188. 10.1001/jamafacial.2016.1776
• 97 Erol OO. The Turkish delight: a pliable graft for rhinoplasty. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2000; 105: 2229-2241; discussion 2242-2223. 10.1097/00006534-200005000-00051
• 98 Daniel RK, Calvert JW. Diced cartilage grafts in rhinoplasty surgery. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2004; 113: 2156-2171. 10.1097/01.prs.0000122544.87086.b9
• 99 Calvert JW, Brenner K, DaCosta-Iyer M. et al. Histological analysis of human diced cartilage grafts. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2006; 118: 230-236. 10.1097/01.prs.0000220463.73865.78
• 100 Aydinli S, Biskin S, Dinc AE. et al. Bacterial cellulose as a new graft model for the Turkish delight technique in rhinoplasty: An experiment in 20 rats. Ear, nose, & throat journal 2017; 96: E1-E5
• 101 Erol OO. Long-Term Results and Refinement of the Turkish Delight Technique for Primary and Secondary Rhinoplasty: 25 Years of Experience. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2016; 137: 423-437. 10.1097/01.prs.0000475755.71333.bf
• 102 Tasman AJ. Dorsal Augmentation-Diced Cartilage Techniques: The Diced Cartilage Glue Graft. Facial plastic surgery: FPS 2017; 33: 179-188. 10.1055/s-0037-1598185
• 103 El-Shazly M, El-Shafiey H. Soft versus hard implants in dorsal nasal augmentation: a comparative clinical study. Aesthetic plastic surgery 2012; 36: 1019-1027. 10.1007/s00266-012-9941-y
• 104 Kreutzer C, Hoehne J, Gubisch W. et al. Free Diced Cartilage: A New Application of Diced Cartilage Grafts in Primary and Secondary Rhinoplasty. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2017; 140: 461-470. 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003622
• 105 Muenker R. The bilateral conchal cartilage graft: a new technique in augmentation rhinoplasty. Aesthetic plastic surgery 1984; 8: 37-42
• 106 Hafezi F, Bateni H, Naghibzadeh B. et al. Diced ear cartilage with perichondrial attachment in rhinoplasty: a new concept. Aesthetic surgery journal 2012; 32: 825-832. 10.1177/1090820X12455635
• 107 Lan MY, Park JP, Jang YJ. Donor site morbidities resulting from conchal cartilage harvesting in rhinoplasty. The Journal of laryngology and otology 2017; 131: 529-533. 10.1017/S0022215117000639
• 108 Jurk V, Kampmann H, Iblher N. et al. Long-Term Comparison of Rib and Ear Cartilage Grafts in Autologous and Allogenic Fascia Lata: An Experimental Study in a White Rabbit Model. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2016; 137: 1465-1474 10.1097/PRS.0000000000002133
• 109 Ho TT, Sykes K, Kriet JD. et al. Cartilage Graft Donor Site Morbidity following Rhinoplasty and Nasal Reconstruction. Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction 2018; 11: 278-284 10.1055/s-0037-1607065
• 110 Denecke HJ, Meyer R. Plastic surgery of head and neck. Berlin, New York etc: Springer; 1967
• 111 Straatsma CR. Surgery of the bony nose: comparative evaluation of chisel and saw technique. Plast Reconstr Surg Transplant Bull 1961; 28: 246-248
• 112 Rohrich RJ, Janis JE, Adams WP. et al. An update on the lateral nasal osteotomy in rhinoplasty: an anatomic endoscopic comparison of the external versus the internal approach. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2003; 111: 2461-2462; discussion 2463. doi:10.1097/01.PRS.0000061005.27994.E3
• 113 Gryskiewicz JM, Gryskiewicz KM. Nasal osteotomies: a clinical comparison of the perforating methods versus the continuous technique. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2004; 113: 1445-1456; discussion 1457-1448. 10.1097/01.prs.0000113031.67600.b9
• 114 Robiony M, Toro C, Costa F. et al. Piezosurgery: a new method for osteotomies in rhinoplasty. The Journal of craniofacial surgery 2007; 18: 1098-1100. 10.1097/scs.0b013e3180de6489
• 115 Robiony M, Lazzarotto A, Nocini R. et al. Piezosurgery: Ten Years’ Experience of Percutaneous Osteotomies in Rhinoplasty. Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 2019; 77: 1237-1244. 10.1016/j.joms.2019.01.035
• 116 Gerbault O, Daniel RK, Kosins AM. The Role of Piezoelectric Instrumentation in Rhinoplasty Surgery. Aesthetic surgery journal 2016; 36: 21-34. 10.1093/asj/sjv167
• 117 San Nicolo M, Berghaus A. Advantages of piezoelectric technology in rhinoplasty. Hno 2019; DOI: 10.1007/s00106-019-0675-x..
• 118 Kurt Yazar S, Serin M, Rakici IT. et al. Comparison of piezosurgery, percutaneous osteotomy, and endonasal continuous osteotomy techniques with a caprine skull model. Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery: JPRAS 2019; 72: 107-113. 10.1016/j.bjps.2018.08.025
• 119 Kocak I, Dogan R, Gokler O. A comparison of piezosurgery with conventional techniques for internal osteotomy. European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology: official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS): affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology – Head and Neck Surgery 2017; 274: 2483-2491. 10.1007/s00405-017-4514-y
• 120 Wähmann M, Riedel F, Kovacevic M. et al. Comparison of piezoelectric and conventional osteotomy in rhinoplasty: A systematic review. Hno 2019; 67: 98-109 10.1007/s00106-018-0606-2
• 121 Goodale JL. A new method for the operative correction of exaggerated roman nose. Boston Med Surg J 1899; 140
• 122 Barelli PA. Long term evaluation of „push down“ procedures. Rhinology 1975; 13: 25-32
• 123 Saban Y, Braccini F, Polselli R. Rhinoplasty: morphodynamic anatomy of rhinoplasty. Interest of conservative rhinoplasty. Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord) 2006; 127: 15-22
• 124 Kosins AM, Daniel RK. Decision Making in Preservation Rhinoplasty: A 100 Case Series With One-Year Follow-Up. Aesthetic surgery journal 2019; DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjz107..
• 125 Goksel A, Saban Y. Open Piezo Preservation Rhinoplasty: A Case Report of the New Rhinoplasty Approach. Facial plastic surgery : FPS 2019; 35: 113-118 10.1055/s-0039-1678578
• 126 Wähmann MS, Bulut OC, Bran GM. et al. Systematic Review of Quality-of-Life Measurement After Aesthetic Rhinoplasty. Aesthetic plastic surgery 2018; 42: 1635-1647. 10.1007/s00266-018-1199-6
• 127 Devlin NJ, Appleby J, Buxton M. Getting the most out of PROMs: putting health outcomes at the heart of NHS decision-making. London: King’s Fund; 2010
• 128 Porter ME. What is value in health care?. N Engl J Med 2010; 363: 2477-2481. 10.1056/NEJMp1011024
• 129 Ovretveit J, Zubkoff L, Nelson EC. et al. Using patient-reported outcome measurement to improve patient care. Int J Qual Health Care 2017; 29: 874-879. 10.1093/intqhc/mzx108
• 130 Nelson EC, Eftimovska E, Lind C. et al. Patient reported outcome measures in practice. BMJ 2015; 350: g7818. doi:10.1136/bmj.g7818
• 131 Staniszewska S, Haywood KL, Brett J. et al. Patient and public involvement in patient-reported outcome measures: evolution not revolution. Patient 2012; 5: 79-87. 10.2165/11597150-000000000-00000
• 132 [Anonym] . Guidance for Industry Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. In : Administration USDoHaHSFaD; ed 2009
• 133 Basch E, Bennett AV. Patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials of rare diseases. J Gen Intern Med 2014; 29 (Suppl 3): S801-S803 10.1007/s11606-014-2892-z
• 134 Calvert M, Kyte D, Mercieca-Bebber R. et al. Guidelines for Inclusion of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trial Protocols: The SPIRIT-PRO Extension. JAMA 2018; 319: 483-494 10.1001/jama.2017.21903
• 135 Alsarraf R, Larrabee Jr. WF, Anderson S. et al. Measuring cosmetic facial plastic surgery outcomes: a pilot study. Archives of facial plastic surgery 2001; 3: 198-201
• 136 Meningaud JP, Lantieri L, Bertrand JC. Rhinoplasty: an outcome research. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2008; 121: 251-257 10.1097/01.prs.0000293866.57517.d4
• 137 Saleh AM, Younes A, Friedman O. Cosmetics and function: quality-of-life changes after rhinoplasty surgery. The Laryngoscope 2012; 122: 254-259 10.1002/lary.22390
• 138 Bulut OC, Wallner F, Oladokun D. et al. Long-term quality of life changes after primary septorhinoplasty. Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation 2018; 27: 987-991. 10.1007/s11136-017-1761-8
• 139 Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Scott A. et al. Measuring patient-reported outcomes in facial aesthetic patients: development of the FACE-Q. Facial plastic surgery: FPS 2010; 26: 303-309. 10.1055/s-0030-1262313
• 140 Schwitzer JA, Sher SR, Fan KL. et al. Assessing Patient-Reported Satisfaction with Appearance and Quality of Life following Rhinoplasty Using the FACE-Q Appraisal Scales. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2015; 135: 830e-837e. 10.1097/PRS.0000000000001159
• 141 Ware Jr. J, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 1996; 34: 220-233
• 142 Stewart MG, Witsell DL, Smith TL. et al. Development and validation of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale. Otolaryngology – head and neck surgery: official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. 2004; 130: 157-163 10.1016/j.otohns.2003.09.016
• 143 Moubayed SP, Ioannidis JPA, Saltychev M. et al. The 10-Item Standardized Cosmesis and Health Nasal Outcomes Survey (SCHNOS) for Functional and Cosmetic Rhinoplasty. JAMA facial plastic surgery 2018; 20: 37-42 10.1001/jamafacial.2017.1083
• 144 Bulut C, Wallner F, Plinkert PK. et al. Development and validation of the Functional Rhinoplasty Outcome Inventory 17 (FROI-17). Rhinology 2014; 52: 315-319. 10.4193/Rhin13.098
• 145 Klassen A, Jenkinson C, Fitzpatrick R. et al. Patients' health related quality of life before and after aesthetic surgery. Br J Plast Surg 1996; 49: 433-438
• 146 Ribeiro RVE. Prevalence of Body Dysmorphic Disorder in Plastic Surgery and Dermatology Patients: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. Aesthetic plastic surgery 2017; 41: 964-970. 10.1007/s00266-017-0869-0
• 147 Picavet VA, Prokopakis EP, Gabriels L. et al. High prevalence of body dysmorphic disorder symptoms in patients seeking rhinoplasty. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2011; 128: 509-517 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31821b631f
• 148 Felix GA, de Brito MJ, Nahas FX. et al. Patients with mild to moderate body dysmorphic disorder may benefit from rhinoplasty. Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery: JPRAS 2014; 67: 646-654. 10.1016/j.bjps.2014.01.002
• 149 Bensoussan JC, Bolton MA, Pi S. et al. Quality of life before and after cosmetic surgery. CNS Spectr 2014; 19: 282-292 10.1017/S1092852913000606
• 150 Yang F, Liu Y, Xiao H. et al. Evaluation of Preoperative and Postoperative Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life in Patients Undergoing Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2018; 141: 603-611 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004102
• 151 Sarwer DB, Gibbons LM, Magee L. et al. A prospective, multi-site investigation of patient satisfaction and psychosocial status following cosmetic surgery. Aesthetic surgery journal 2005; 25: 263-269. 10.1016/j.asj.2005.03.009
• 152 Arima LM, Velasco LC, Tiago RS. Crooked nose: outcome evaluations in rhinoplasty. Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology 2011; 77: 510-515
• 153 van Zijl F, Mokkink LB, Haagsma JA. et al. Evaluation of Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review. JAMA facial plastic surgery 2019; 21: 152-162. 10.1001/jamafacial.2018.1639