Results Evaluation in Reduction Rhinoplasty

Summary

Introduction: Final results evaluation after rhinoplasty is a not a topic widely studied from the patient's viewpoint.

Objective: Evaluate the satisfaction of the patients submitted to reduction rhinoplasty, from the questionnaire Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation (ROE).

Method: Longitudinal study, retrospective cut type, of the preoperative and postoperative satisfaction. The sample was composed by 28 patients who were submitted to rhinoplasty and answered the ROE questionnaire. Three variables were obtained: satisfaction note that the patient had with his/her image before the surgery; note of satisfaction with the current appearance; the difference of the average satisfaction notes between postoperative and preoperative approaches.

Results: The postoperative note was higher than the preoperative in all patients. We noticed a difference between the average of the postoperative and preoperative of 48.3 (p < 0.0001). In the preoperative approach we noticed that 100% of the patients had satisfaction of <50. In the postoperative there was a 92.9% migration from classification <50 to classes: 50 to <75 considered to be good (25%); ≥75 considered to be an excellent outcome (67.9%).

Conclusions: The ROE questionnaire is a helpful tool to show the satisfaction of the patient submitted to reduction rhinoplasty. About 92% of the patients submitted to reduction rhinoplasty consider the postoperative result to be good or excellent.

Resumo

Introdução: A avaliação do resultado final após rinoplastia é um tema pouco estudado pela visão do paciente.

Objetivo: Avaliar a satisfação dos pacientes submetidos à rinoplastia de redução, a partir do questionário Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation (ROE).

Método: Estudo longitudinal, tipo coorte retrospectivo, da satisfação pré-operatória e pós-operatória. A amostra foi composta por 28 pacientes submetidos à rinoplastia que responderam ao questionário ROE. Foram obtidas três variáveis: nota da satisfação que o paciente tinha com sua imagem antes da cirurgia; nota da satisfação com a atual aparência; e a diferença das médias das notas da satisfação entre pós e pré-operatório.

Resultados: A nota pós-operatória foi superior a pré-operatória em todos os pacientes. Foi observada diferença entre as médias das notas do pós e pré-operatório de 48,3 (p < 0,0001). No pré-operatório foi observado que 100% dos pacientes apresentaram satisfação <50. No pós-operatório foi observado que 92,9% migraram da classe <50 para as classes: 50 a <75 considerado bom (25%); ≥75 considerado excelente resultado (67,9%).

Conclusão: O questionário ROE é uma ferramenta útil em demonstrar a satisfação do paciente submetido à rinoplastia de redução. Cerca de 92% dos pacientes submetidos à rinoplastia de redução consideram bom ou excelente resultado no pós-operatório.

Keywords

quality of life - results evaluation (health care) - rhinoplasty - patient satisfaction

Palavras-chave

qualidade de vida - avaliação de resultados (cuidados de saúde) - rinoplastia - satisfação do paciente

• Bibliographical References

• 1 Ching S, Thoma A, McCabe RE, Antony MM. Measuring Outcomes in Aesthetic Surgery: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 111: 469-480
• 2 Rhee JS, McMullin BT. Measuring outcomes in facial plastic surgery: a decade of progress. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008; 16: 387-93
• 3 Rhee JS, McMullin BT. Outcome Measures in Facial Plastic Surgery. Pacient-Reported and Clinical Efficacy Measures. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2008; 10: 194-207
• 4 Kosowski TR, McCarthy C, Reavey PL, Scott AM, Wilkins EG, Cano SJ, Klassen AF, Carr N, Cordeiro PG, Pusic AL. A Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures after Facial Cosmetic Surgery and/or Nonsurgical Facial Rejuvenation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 123: 1819-27
• 5 Maniglia JV, Ferreira PGF, Maniglia LP, Maniglia CP, Maniglia MP. Avaliação clínica, seleção de pacientes, cuidados pré e pós-operatórios. Em: Maniglia AJ, Maniglia JJ, Maniglia JV. Rinoplastia - Estética-Funcional-Reconstrutora. Rio de Janeiro: Revinter; 2002. . p. 30-3.
• 6 Meningaud JP, Lantieri L, Bertrand JC. Rhinoplasty: An Outcome Research. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 121: 251-7
• 7 Alsarraf R. Outcomes Research in Facial Plastic Surgery: A Review and New Directions. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2000; 24: 192-7
• 8 Alsarraf R, Larrabee WF, Anderson S, Murakami CS, Johnson CMJ. Measuring Cosmetic Facial Plastic Surgery Outcomes. A Pilot Study. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2001; 3: 198-201
• 9 Litner JA, Rotenberg BW, Dennis M, Adamson PA. Impact of Cosmetic Facial Surgery on Satisfactions with Appearance and Quality of Life. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2008; 10: 79-83
• 10 Mckiernan DC, Banfield G, Kumar R, Hinton AE. Patient benefit from functional and cosmetic rhinoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol 2001; 26: 50-2
• 11 Hellings PW, Trenité GJN. Long-Term Patient Satisfaction After Revision Rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 2007; 117: 985-9
• 12 McKinney P, Cook JQ. A critical evaluation of 200 rhinoplasties. Ann Plast Surg 1981; 7: 357-61
• 13 Guyuron B, Bokhar F. Patient Satisfaction Following Rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1996; 20: 153-7
• 14 Bergman S, Feldman LS, Barkun JS. Evaluating Surgical Outcomes. Surg Clin N Am 2006; 86: 129-49
• 15 Sullivan MJ. Rhinoplasty: Planning Photo Documentation and Imaging. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2002; 26 (Suppl. 01) S7
• 16 Ercolani M, Baldaro B, Rosse N, Trombini G. Five-Year Follow-up of Cosmetic Rhinoplasty. J Psychossom Res 1999; 47: 283-6