Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in a Facial Reconstruction Case Series Following the Implementation of an Integrated Craniofacial Multidisciplinary Team Clinic, Three-Dimensional Photography, and Computer Modeling

BACKGROUND: Facial reconstruction surgery is often a complex and staged process, leading to lengthy reconstructive journeys for patients. The integration of a clinical pathway can give patients a clearer understanding of what to expect at each stage of their reconstructive journey. OBJECTIVES: The authors demonstrate how the incorporation of multidisciplinary team clinics, three-dimensional (3D) photography, and 3D modeling into an integrated pathway can streamline the process for patients undergoing facial reconstructive surgeries and aid their understanding of their surgeries. METHODS: A novel clinical pathway was developed for patients undergoing facial reconstructive surgery at a tertiary reconstructive unit in London. A case series was collated of 35 patients who had been through the integrated pathway. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed using FACE-Q scales, Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale, Self-Perception of Age score, and Ordinal Rank change in facial aesthetic appearance, determined subjectively and objectively. Statistical analysis was performed to calculate mean averages for each scale and PROM. RESULTS: High patient satisfaction with overall facial appearance, aging appearance, and the decision-making process was demonstrated. The average perceived improvement in age-related facial appearance was −7.7 years postreconstruction compared with prereconstruction. The Ordinal Rank improvement on facial aesthetic appearance showed considerable improvement, both subjectively and objectively. CONCLUSIONS: The authors advocate the implementation of an integrated clinical pathway for facial reconstruction, with positive impacts observed in terms of patient satisfaction and objective assessments of facial appearance. Similar principles can be extrapolated to other aspects of reconstructive surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3: [Image: see text]