Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology 12/2015

01-12-2015 | Rhinology

Assessing the rhinoplasty outcome: inter-rater variability of aesthetic perception in the light of objective facial analysis

Authors: Kerem Ozturk, Sercan Gode, Ceyda Karahan, Rasit Midilli

Published in: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology | Issue 12/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the success of rhinoplasty by evaluating the inter-rater variability in the light of primary indication as functional or cosmetic. Subjective aesthetic perception was compared with objective facial analysis. 45 rhinoplasty patients were included in the study. 25 had cosmetic plus functional reasons with septal deviation (group 1) and 20 had pure cosmetic reasons without septal deviation (group 2). Preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively, four individuals (patient, surgeon, 2 independent surgeons) rated the aesthetic appearance of the nose with visual analogue scale. Facial photogrammetric analysis was applied. The patient’s aesthetic perception score was significantly correlated with the two independent surgeons (p < 0.05) whereas not with the primary surgeons. Regarding the objective parameters, patient’s aesthetic perception was significantly correlated with the dorsal alignment in both groups (p < 0.05). General satisfaction score was significantly correlated with the nasal breathing as well as with the aesthetic perception scores in both groups. This correlation was higher for aesthetic perception in group 1 and nasal breathing in group 2. Inter-rater variability of outcome perception was higher in cosmetic patients. Nasal dorsal alignment was the only objective parameter which was correlated with the patient’s perception. Patient’s perception of outcome has better represented the objective photogrammetric analysis rather than the primary surgeons. An interesting finding was the more significant correlation of general satisfaction with aesthetic perception in the functional group whereas nasal breathing in the cosmetic group.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Sharp HR, Tingay RS, Coman S, Mills V, Roberts DN (2002) Computer imaging and patient satisfaction in rhinoplasty surgery. J Laryngol Otol 116(12):1009–1013CrossRefPubMed Sharp HR, Tingay RS, Coman S, Mills V, Roberts DN (2002) Computer imaging and patient satisfaction in rhinoplasty surgery. J Laryngol Otol 116(12):1009–1013CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Guyuron B, Bokhari F (1996) Patient satisfaction following rhinoplasty. Aesthet Plast Surg. 20(2):153–157CrossRef Guyuron B, Bokhari F (1996) Patient satisfaction following rhinoplasty. Aesthet Plast Surg. 20(2):153–157CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Konstantinidis I, Triaridis S, Printza A, Triaridis A, Noussios G, Karagiannidis K (2003) Assessment of patient benefit from septo-rhinoplasty with the use of Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) and Nasal Symptom Questionnaire (NSQ). Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg 57(2):123–129PubMed Konstantinidis I, Triaridis S, Printza A, Triaridis A, Noussios G, Karagiannidis K (2003) Assessment of patient benefit from septo-rhinoplasty with the use of Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) and Nasal Symptom Questionnaire (NSQ). Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg 57(2):123–129PubMed
4.
go back to reference McKiernan DC, Banfield G, Kumar R, Hinton AE (2001) Patient benefit from functional and cosmetic rhinoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 26(1):50–52CrossRefPubMed McKiernan DC, Banfield G, Kumar R, Hinton AE (2001) Patient benefit from functional and cosmetic rhinoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 26(1):50–52CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Stewart EJ, Robinson K, Wilson JA (1996) Assessment of patient’s benefit from rhinoplasty. Rhinology 34(1):57–59PubMed Stewart EJ, Robinson K, Wilson JA (1996) Assessment of patient’s benefit from rhinoplasty. Rhinology 34(1):57–59PubMed
6.
go back to reference Mohammadshahi M, Pourreza A, Orojlo PH, Mahmoodi M, Akbari F (2014) Rhinoplasty as a medicalized phenomenon: a 25-center survey on quality of life before and after cosmetic rhinoplasty. Aesthet Plast Surg 38(4):615–619CrossRef Mohammadshahi M, Pourreza A, Orojlo PH, Mahmoodi M, Akbari F (2014) Rhinoplasty as a medicalized phenomenon: a 25-center survey on quality of life before and after cosmetic rhinoplasty. Aesthet Plast Surg 38(4):615–619CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Mendis D, Cheang PP, Glossop LP (2013) Audit: patient reported outcomes of extracorporeal septorhinoplasty. Rhinology 51(1):88–92PubMed Mendis D, Cheang PP, Glossop LP (2013) Audit: patient reported outcomes of extracorporeal septorhinoplasty. Rhinology 51(1):88–92PubMed
8.
go back to reference Cingi C, Eskiizmir G (2013) Deviated nose attenuates the degree of patient satisfaction and quality of life in rhinoplasty: a prospective controlled study. Clin Otolaryngol 38(2):136–141CrossRefPubMed Cingi C, Eskiizmir G (2013) Deviated nose attenuates the degree of patient satisfaction and quality of life in rhinoplasty: a prospective controlled study. Clin Otolaryngol 38(2):136–141CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Moolenburgh SE, Mureau MA, Hofer SO (2008) Aesthetic outcome after nasal reconstruction: patient versus panel perception. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 61(12):1459–1464CrossRefPubMed Moolenburgh SE, Mureau MA, Hofer SO (2008) Aesthetic outcome after nasal reconstruction: patient versus panel perception. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 61(12):1459–1464CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Claes G, Claes J, Wuyts FL (2009) Outcome of septorhinoplasty: a comparison of patient and surgeon views. B-ENT 5(4):203–211PubMed Claes G, Claes J, Wuyts FL (2009) Outcome of septorhinoplasty: a comparison of patient and surgeon views. B-ENT 5(4):203–211PubMed
11.
go back to reference Lohuis PJ, Hakim S, Duivesteijn W, Knobbe A, Tasman AJ (2013) Benefits of a short, practical questionnaire to measure subjective perception of nasal appearance after aesthetic rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 132(6):913e–923eCrossRefPubMed Lohuis PJ, Hakim S, Duivesteijn W, Knobbe A, Tasman AJ (2013) Benefits of a short, practical questionnaire to measure subjective perception of nasal appearance after aesthetic rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 132(6):913e–923eCrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Murrell GL (2014) Correlation between subjective and objective results in nasal surgery. Aesthet Surg J 34(2):249–257CrossRefPubMed Murrell GL (2014) Correlation between subjective and objective results in nasal surgery. Aesthet Surg J 34(2):249–257CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Davis RE, Bublik M (2012) Psychological considerations in the revision rhinoplasty patient. Facial Plast Surg 28(4):374–379CrossRefPubMed Davis RE, Bublik M (2012) Psychological considerations in the revision rhinoplasty patient. Facial Plast Surg 28(4):374–379CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Assessing the rhinoplasty outcome: inter-rater variability of aesthetic perception in the light of objective facial analysis
Authors
Kerem Ozturk
Sercan Gode
Ceyda Karahan
Rasit Midilli
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology / Issue 12/2015
Print ISSN: 0937-4477
Electronic ISSN: 1434-4726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-015-3494-z

Other articles of this Issue 12/2015

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology 12/2015 Go to the issue