Download PDF
Facial Plast Surg 2022; 38(02): 124-130
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1741502
Original Article

The Quality of Online Information on Cosmetic Injectable Fillers: Current Status

Eamon Shamil 
1   Department of Ear, Nose and Throat Surgery, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, London, United Kingdom
,
Alexander S. North
2   Department of Ear, Nose and Throat Surgery, St George's University Hospital, London, United Kingdom
,
Ka Siu Fan 
3   Department of Neurology/Stroke Medicine, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Surrey, United Kingdom
,
Hanna D'Souza
4   GKT School of Medical Education, King's College London
,
Maja Kaladjiska
3   Department of Neurology/Stroke Medicine, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Surrey, United Kingdom
,
Alwyn D'Souza
5   Department of Ear, Nose and Throat Surgery, University Hospital Lewisham, London, United Kingdom
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Web-based health information plays an increasingly vital role in spreading health information. Many patients interested in aesthetic surgery study the procedure on the Internet. This study aims to evaluate the quality of online health information on injectable fillers using the modified “Ensuring Quality Information for Patients” (EQIP) tool. Nine different search terms, including “fillers,” “fuller cheeks,” “wrinkle removal,” and “antiwrinkle treatment” were identified and queried on Google. Unique links from the first three pages of each search term were identified and evaluated if the contents were in English language and were for general non-medical public use. A total of 172 websites were analyzed, with a median EQIP score of 20. In total 129 websites belonged to aesthetic practitioners, of which 81 were operated by medical doctors. Eighty-three percent of websites disclosed some forms of postoperative complications, most commonly edema (74%) and bruising (73%). Blindness and tissue necrosis were only mentioned by 12 and 10% of the websites, respectively. The current health information available on injectable fillers is of poor quality. While many do provide some information on risks, the majority of websites fail to disclose severe complications and quantifying risks. This poses a barrier against informed decision-making and may lead to unrealistic expectations. Patient satisfaction and expectations may be improved by developing better online education resources on fillers.

Keywords

injectable fillers - patient information - ensuring quality information for patients - aesthetic surgery - cosmetic procedures

Note

The authors confirm that the ethical policies of the journal, as noted on the journal's author guidelines page, have been adhered to. Formal ethical approval was not required as there was no involvement of patients in any form with this study.


Supplementary Material



Publication History

Article published online:
03 February 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Kim J-E, Sykes JM. Hyaluronic acid fillers: history and overview. Facial Plast Surg 2011; 27 (06) 523-528
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Ballin AC, Brandt FS, Cazzaniga A. Dermal fillers: an update. Am J Clin Dermatol 2015; 16 (04) 271-283
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Ogilvie P, Thulesen J, Leys C. et al. Expert consensus on injection technique and area-specific recommendations for the hyaluronic acid dermal filler VYC-12L to treat fine cutaneous lines. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol 2020; 13: 267-274
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Department of Health. Review of the regulation of cosmetic interventions final report April 2013. 2013 April Accessed September 24, 2021 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-the-regulation-of-cosmetic-interventions
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 American Society of Plastic Surgeons. 2019 National Plastic Surgery Statistics. 2019 Accessed September 24, 2021 at: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2019/plastic-surgery-statistics-report-2019.pdf
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Report of the 2010 Plastic Surgery Statistics Report of the 2010 Plastic Surgery Statistics 2010 Plastic Surgery Statistics. 2010 Accessed September 24, 2021 at: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2010/plastic-surgery-statistics-full-report-2010.pdf
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Haneke E. Managing complications of fillers: rare and not-so-rare. J Cutan Aesthet Surg 2015; 8 (04) 198-210
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Chiang YZ, Pierone G, Al-Niaimi F. Dermal fillers: pathophysiology, prevention and treatment of complications. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2017; 31 (03) 405-413
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rayess HM, Svider PF, Hanba C. et al. A cross-sectional analysis of adverse events and litigation for injectable fillers. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2018; 20 (03) 207-214
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Heydenrych I, Kapoor KM, De Boulle K. et al. A 10-point plan for avoiding hyaluronic acid dermal filler-related complications during facial aesthetic procedures and algorithms for management. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol 2018; 11: 603-611
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Sito G, Manzoni V, Sommariva R. Vascular complications after facial filler injection: a literature review and meta-analysis. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol 2019; 12 (06) E65-E72
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Tran AQ, Lee WW. Vision loss and blindness following fillers. J Dermatol Skin Sci 2021; 3 (02) 1-4
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Montemurro P, Porcnik A, Hedén P, Otte M. 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 2015; 39 (02) 270-277
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Wollmann K, der Keylen PV, Tomandl J. et al. The information needs of internet users and their requirements for online health information—a scoping review of qualitative and quantitative studies. Patient Educ Couns 2021; 104 (08) 1904-1932
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Moult B, Franck LS, Brady H. Ensuring quality information for patients: development and preliminary validation of a new instrument to improve the quality of written health care information. Health Expect 2004; 7 (02) 165-175
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Palma AF, Zuk G, Raptis DA. et al. Quality of information for women seeking breast augmentation in the Internet. J Plast Surg Hand Surg 2016; 50 (05) 262-271
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Zuk G, Palma AF, Eylert G, Raptis DA, Guggenheim M, Shafighi M. Systematic review of quality of patient information on liposuction in the internet. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2016; 4 (06) e759
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Shamil E, Scenza GD, Ghani SA. et al. A quality assessment of online patient information regarding rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 2021
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Shamil E, Cook P, D'Souza A, Syed I, Joshi A, Rachmanidou A. Patient perceptions of the use of cocaine in sinonasal surgery. Clin Otolaryngol 2021; 46 (06) 1300-1303
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Google. Google Ads—Get More Customers With Easy Online Advertising. Accessed April 30, 2020 at: https://ads.google.com/intl/en_GB/home/
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Ghani S, Fan KS, Fan KH, Lenti L, Raptis D. Using the ensuring quality information for patients tool to assess patient information on appendicitis websites: systematic search and evaluation. J Med Internet Res 2021; 23 (03) e22618
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Raptis DA, Sinanyan M, Ghani S, Soggiu F, Gilliland JJ, Imber C. Quality assessment of patient information on the management of gallstone disease in the internet—a systematic analysis using the modified ensuring quality information for patients tool. HPB (Oxford) 2019; 21 (12) 1632-1640
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Fan KS, Ghani SA, Machairas N. et al. COVID-19 prevention and treatment information on the internet: a systematic analysis and quality assessment. BMJ Open 2020; 10 (09) e040487
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Search Engine Journal. Over 25% of People Click the First Google Search Result. 2020. Accessed September 24, 2021 at: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-first-page-clicks/374516/
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration. IPDAS Collaboration Background Document. Vol. 2018. 2005. Available at: http://ipdas.ohri.ca/IPDAS_Background.pdf
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 British Medical Association. BMA Patient Information Awards. Vol. 2018. 2018. Available at: https://www.bma.org.uk/library/patient-information-awards
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 General Medical Council. Guidance on professional standards and ethics for doctors Decision making and consent. 2020 Accessed September 25, 2021 at: www.gmc-uk.org/guidance
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Ricketts D, Roper T, Rogers B, Phadnis J, Elsayed S, Sokol D. Informed consent: the view from the trenches. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2019; 101 (01) 44-49
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Anderson OA, Wearne IMJ. Informed consent for elective surgery—what is best practice?. J R Soc Med 2007; 100 (02) 97-100
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Bunker TD. An information leaflet for surgical patients. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1983; 65 (04) 242-243
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 George CF, Waters WE, Nicholas JA. Prescription information leaflets: a pilot study in general practice. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1983; 287 (6400): 1193-1196
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Frueh FS, Palma AF, Raptis DA, Graf CP, Giovanoli P, Calcagni M. Carpal tunnel syndrome: analysis of online patient information with the EQIP tool. Chir Main 2015; 34 (03) 113-121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Dorfman RG, Mahmood E, Ren A. et al. Google ranking of plastic surgeons values social media presence over academic pedigree and experience. Aesthet Surg J 2019; 39 (04) 447-451
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Lopez J, Lopez S, Means J. et al. Financial conflicts of interest: an association between funding and findings in plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 136 (05) 690e-697e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Shamil E, D'Souza AD. Cosmetic Facial Interventions. In: England RJ, Shamil E. eds. Scott-Brown's Essential Otorhinolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery 1st ed. London, CRC Press: 2022. chapter 49
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar