Cargando…

Aesthetics Assessment and Patient Reported Outcome of Nasolabial Aesthetics in 18-Year-Old Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip

OBJECTIVE: To determine if there is a correlation between objective nasolabial aesthetics assessment using the Cleft Aesthetic Rating Scale (CARS) and patient satisfaction. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a generic satisfaction questionnaire and independent assessment by three cleft surgeons of th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mulder, Frans J., Mosmuller, David G. M., de Vet, Riekie H. C. W., Don Griot, J. P. W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6696741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30808197
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1055665619832439
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To determine if there is a correlation between objective nasolabial aesthetics assessment using the Cleft Aesthetic Rating Scale (CARS) and patient satisfaction. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a generic satisfaction questionnaire and independent assessment by three cleft surgeons of the nasolabial area of these patients on 2D frontal photographs, using the CARS. SETTING: The Vrije Universiteit Medical Center and The Academic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam. PATIENTS: Thirty-nine 18-year old patients with a repaired complete or incomplete unilateral cleft lip, with or without a cleft palate, and a completed satisfaction questionnaire. Exclusion criteria were an incomplete questionnaire; a history of facial trauma; and congenital syndromes affecting facial appearance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The correlation between surgeon evaluation (on a 5-point Likert scale) and patient satisfaction (not, moderately or very satisfied) on nasolabial appearance was assessed using Spearman rho (ρ). RESULTS: There was a negligible correlation between surgeon evaluation and patient satisfaction on nose assessment (ρ = 0.20) and a moderate correlation on lip assessment (ρ = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Most literature supports this discrepancy between different objective aesthetics evaluation methods and subjective patient-reported outcome measures, suggesting there are factors playing a role in patient satisfaction that are impossible to objectify with assessment methods. Therefore, a strong emphasis should remain on clear communication between the physician and patient regarding their expectations, perception, and satisfaction of surgery results.