Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2/2019

01-04-2019 | Original Article

Assessing Improvement of Patient Satisfaction Following Facelift Surgery Using the FACE-Q Scales: A Prospective and Multicenter Study

Authors: M. Berger, R. Weigert, E. Pascal, K. Hufschmidt, V. Casoli

Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Issue 2/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Assessment of patient satisfaction following an aesthetic surgery has shown an increasing trend over the past years. To date, there is no prospective and comprehensive study evaluating this aspect after surgical facial and neck rejuvenation. The aim of the current work was to address patient satisfaction after face and neck lift surgery using a validated questionnaire.

Patients and Methods

We present a prospective and multicenter study (five regional centers) involving all patients undergoing face and neck lift surgery between April 2015 and April 2017 in several French centers for aesthetic surgery. All subjects assessed the FACE-Q scales before the procedure, and furtherly at 3-month, 6-month and 12-month follow-ups.

Results

Thirty-six patients were included with a median age of 58.5 years old [IQR 54.0–66.0]. The FACE-Q outcomes were significantly higher at 3-month follow-up (p < 0.001). Seventy-five percent of the patients underwent an additional surgical procedure associated with face and neck lift. Particularly, a combined blepharoplasty led to a significant increase in the score of global facial appearance. The patients considered themselves a mean of 6 years younger in the third month after surgery. These results remained constant at six and twelve postoperative months.

Conclusion

A statistically significant improvement of the FACE-Q scores could be highlighted on every scale, with permanent results at 6 and 12 months postsurgery. We hereby present the first study with evidence that appearance and quality of life outcomes can be reliably assessed after rhytidectomy.

Level of Evidence IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.​springer.​com/​00266.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Pusic AL, Lemaine V, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Cano SJ (2011) Patient-reported outcome measures in plastic surgery: use and interpretation in evidence-based medicine. Plast Reconstr Surg 127(3):1361–1367PubMedCrossRef
2.
Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Scott A, Snell L, Pusic AL (2010) Measuring patient-reported outcomes in facial aesthetic patients: development of the FACE-Q. Facial Plast Surg 26(4):303–309PubMedCrossRef
3.
4.
Aaronson N, Alonso J, Burnam A, Lohr KN, Patrick DL, Perrin E et al (2002) Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 11(3):193–205CrossRef
5.
Panchapakesan V, Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Scott AM, Pusic AL (2013) Development and psychometric evaluation of the FACE-Q aging appraisal scale and patient-perceived age visual analog scale. Aesthet Surg J. 33(8):1099–1109PubMedCrossRef
6.
Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Cano SJ (2013) Development and psychometric evaluation of the FACE-Q satisfaction with appearance scale: a new patient-reported outcome instrument for facial aesthetics patients. Clin Plast Surg 40(2):249–260PubMedCrossRef
7.
Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Schwitzer JA, Scott AM, Pusic AL (2015) FACE-Q scales for healthrelated quality of life, early life impact, satisfaction with outcomes, and decision to have treatment: development and validation. Plast Reconstr Surg 135(2):375–386PubMedCrossRef
8.
Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Scott AM, Pusic AL (2014) Measuring outcomes that matter to face-lift patients: development and validation of FACE-Q appearance appraisal scales and adverse effects checklist for the lower face and neck. Plast Reconstr Surg 133(1):21–30PubMedCrossRef
9.
Schwitzer JA, Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Baker SB, East C, Pusic AL (2015) Measuring satisfaction with appearance: validation of the FACE-Q scales for the nose, forehead, cheekbones, and chin. Plast Reconstr Surg 136(4 Suppl):140–141CrossRef
10.
Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Pusic AL (2016) FACE-Q satisfaction with appearance scores from close to 1000 facial aesthetic patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 137(3):651e–652ePubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
11.
Pusic A, Klassen A, Panchapakesan V, Cano S (2014) Response to “The FACE-Q: the importance of full disclosure and sound methodology in outcomes studies”. Aesthet Surg J 34(4):628–631PubMedCrossRef
12.
Albornoz CR, Pusic AL, Reavey P, Scott AM, Klassen AF, Cano SJ et al (2013) Measuring health-related quality of life outcomes in head and neck reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg 40(2):341–349PubMedCrossRef
13.
14.
Lexer R. Zur Gestichtsplastik (1910) Arch Klin Chir 92:749
15.
Skoog T (1974) Plastic surgery: new methods and refinements. WB Saunders, Philadelphia
16.
Mitz V, Peyronie M (1976) The superficial musculo-aponeurotic system (SMAS) in the parotid and cheek area. Plast Reconstr Surg 58(1):80–88PubMedCrossRef
17.
Kappos EA, Temp M, Schaefer DJ, Haug M, Kalbermatten DF, Toth BA (2017) Validating facial aesthetic surgery results with the FACE-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg 139(4):839–845PubMedCrossRef
18.
Kosowski TR, McCarthy C, Reavey PL, Scott AM, Wilkins EG, Cano SJ et al (2009) A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures after facial cosmetic surgery and/or nonsurgical facial rejuvenation. Plast Reconstr Surg 123(6):1819–1827PubMedCrossRef
19.
Jacono A, Chastant RP, Dibelius G (2016) Association of patient self-esteem with perceived outcome after face-lift surgery. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 18(1):42–46CrossRef
20.
Yin Z, Wang D, Ma Y, Hao S, Ren H, Zhang T et al (2016) Self-esteem, self-efficacy, and appearance assessment of young female patients undergoing facial cosmetic surgery: a comparative study of the chinese population. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 18(1):20–26CrossRef
21.
von Soest T, Kvalem IL, Roald HE, Skolleborg KC (2009) The effects of cosmetic surgery on body image, self-esteem, and psychological problems. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 62(10):1238–1244CrossRef
22.
Reilly MJ, Tomsic JA, Fernandez SJ, Davison SP (2015) Effect of facial rejuvenation surgery on perceived attractiveness, femininity, and personality. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 17(3):202–207PubMedCrossRef
23.
von Soest T, Kvalem IL, Skolleborg KC, Roald HE (2011) Psychosocial changes after cosmetic surgery: a 5-year follow-up study. Plast Reconstr Surg 128(3):765–772CrossRef
24.
Swanson E (2011) Objective assessment of change in apparent age after facial rejuvenation surgery. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 64(9):1124–1131PubMedCrossRef
25.
Zimm AJ, Modabber M, Fernandes V, Karimi K, Adamson PA (2013) Objective assessment of perceived age reversal and improvement in attractiveness after aging face surgery. JAMA. Facial Plast Surg 15(6):405–410CrossRef
26.
Chauhan N, Warner JP, Adamson PA (2012) Perceived age change after aesthetic facial surgical procedures quantifying outcomes of aging face surgery. Arch Facial Plast Surg 14(4):258–262PubMedCrossRef
27.
Sinno S, Schwitzer J, Anzai L, Thorne CH (2015) Face-lift satisfaction using the FACE-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg 136(2):239–242PubMedCrossRef
28.
Knoll BI, Attkiss KJ, Persing JA (2008) The influence of forehead, brow, and periorbital aesthetics on perceived expression in the youthful face. Plast Reconstr Surg 121(5):1793–1802PubMedCrossRef
29.
Forte AJ, Andrew TW, Colasante C, Persing JA (2015) Perception of age, attractiveness, and tiredness after isolated and combined facial subunit aging. Aesthetic Plast Surg 39(6):856–869PubMedCrossRef
30.
Pantaloni M, Sullivan P (2000) Relevance of the lesser occipital nerve in facial rejuvenation surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 105:2594–2599PubMedCrossRef
31.
Leist F, Masson J, Erich JB (1977) A review of 324 rhytidectomies, emphasizing complications and patient dissatisfaction. Plast Reconstr Surg 59:525–529PubMedCrossRef
32.
Metadata
Title
Assessing Improvement of Patient Satisfaction Following Facelift Surgery Using the FACE-Q Scales: A Prospective and Multicenter Study
Authors
M. Berger
R. Weigert
E. Pascal
K. Hufschmidt
V. Casoli
Publication date
01-04-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery / Issue 2/2019
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-018-1277-9

Other articles of this Issue 2/2019

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2/2019 Go to the issue

Original Article

M1/M2 Macrophages Play Different Roles in Adipogenic Differentiation of PDGFRα+ Preadipocytes In Vitro

Original Article

The Efficacy of Different Volumes on Ultrasound-Guided Type-I Pectoral Nerve Block for Postoperative Analgesia After Subpectoral Breast Augmentation: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study

Original Article

Effects of Hat-Shaped Mortised Genioplasty with Genioglossus Muscle Advancement on Retrogenia and Snoring: Assessment of Esthetic, Functional, and Psychosocial Results

Original Article

Internal Carotid Artery Embolism After Autologous Fat Injection for Temporal Augmentation

Original Article

Aesthetic Rhinoplasty and Nasal Obstruction: Presentation of Results of a 100-Patient Study by Using NOSE Inventory

Innovative Techniques

Sensation-Sparing Correction of Inverted Nipples Using the ‘Drawbridge’ Flap Approach