Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2/2019

01-04-2019 | Alopecia | Original Article

Evaluating the Satisfaction of Patients Undergoing Hair Transplantation Surgery Using the FACE-Q Scales

Authors: Yang Liu, Fang Liu, Qian Qu, Zhe-xiang Fan, Yong Miao, Zhi-qi Hu

Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Issue 2/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

It is necessary to evaluate a successful cosmetic procedure from the patients’ perspective. FACE-Q is a patient-reported outcome scale for patients undergoing cosmetic procedures. However, currently there are no FACE-Q scales used in the field of hair transplant surgery. This article aims to apply FACE-Q scales to evaluate the satisfaction of patients undergoing hair transplantation surgery.

Methods

FACE-Q scales were modified to contain both preoperative and 6-month postoperative self-assessment, including baseline preoperative information of patients (such as age, family history of alopecia, Hamilton’ alopecia grade),preoperative self-assessment (satisfaction with appearance, the preoperative visual age, expected visual age) and postoperative self-assessment (satisfaction with appearance, postoperative visual age, satisfaction with decision, psychological well-being and social function). Besides, early life impact and recovery early symptoms were also re-evaluated.

Results

The mean difference between the 6-month satisfaction with appearance and baseline scores showed a significant increase of 29.62 (baseline, 46.97; 6-month, 76.59; P < 0.001) and patients perceived they appeared 5.81 years younger after surgery (P < 0.001). Postoperative satisfaction with appearance has no significant relevance with gender (P = 0.460), age (P = 0.529), marriage (P = 0.811) or family history of alopecia (P = 0.641). However, income (P = 0.003), educational level (P = 0.003), the purpose of hair transplantation (P = 0.018) and early life impact (P = 0.002) were shown to have a significant impact on satisfaction with appearance.

Conclusions

The FACE-Q scales are a valid and reliable patient-reported outcome tool for patients undergoing hair transplantation and can be widely used to evaluate the satisfaction of patients undergoing such surgery.

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.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Epstein JS (2003) Hair transplantation for men with advanced degrees of hair loss. Plast Reconstr Surg 111(1):414–421 (discussion 422–424) PubMedCrossRef Epstein JS (2003) Hair transplantation for men with advanced degrees of hair loss. Plast Reconstr Surg 111(1):414–421 (discussion 422–424) PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Hibler BP, Schwitzer J, Rossi AM (2016) Assessing improvement of facial appearance and quality of life after minimally-invasive cosmetic dermatology procedures using the FACE-Q scales. J Drugs Dermatol 15(1):62–67PubMed Hibler BP, Schwitzer J, Rossi AM (2016) Assessing improvement of facial appearance and quality of life after minimally-invasive cosmetic dermatology procedures using the FACE-Q scales. J Drugs Dermatol 15(1):62–67PubMed
4.
go back to reference Rhee JS, McMullin BT (2008) Measuring outcomes in facial plastic surgery: a decade of progress. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 16(4):387–393PubMedCrossRef Rhee JS, McMullin BT (2008) Measuring outcomes in facial plastic surgery: a decade of progress. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 16(4):387–393PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference 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 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
6.
go back to reference 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 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
7.
go back to reference Kosowski TR, McCarthy C, Reavey PL 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 Kosowski TR, McCarthy C, Reavey PL 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
8.
go back to reference Prieto L, Alonso J, Lamarca R, Wright BD (1998) Rasch measurement for reducing the items of the Nottingham Health Profile. J Outcome Meas 2(4):285–301PubMed Prieto L, Alonso J, Lamarca R, Wright BD (1998) Rasch measurement for reducing the items of the Nottingham Health Profile. J Outcome Meas 2(4):285–301PubMed
9.
go back to reference Andrich D (2004) Controversy and the Rasch model: a characteristic of incompatible paradigms? Med Care 42(1 Suppl):I7–I16PubMed Andrich D (2004) Controversy and the Rasch model: a characteristic of incompatible paradigms? Med Care 42(1 Suppl):I7–I16PubMed
10.
go back to reference Sadick NS (2008) The impact of cosmetic interventions on quality of life. Dermatol Online J 14(8):2PubMed Sadick NS (2008) The impact of cosmetic interventions on quality of life. Dermatol Online J 14(8):2PubMed
11.
go back to reference Garratt A, Schmidt L, Mackintosh A, Fitzpatrick R (2002) Quality of life measurement: bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures. BMJ 324(7351):1417PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Garratt A, Schmidt L, Mackintosh A, Fitzpatrick R (2002) Quality of life measurement: bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures. BMJ 324(7351):1417PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Andrich D (2011) Rating scales and Rasch measurement. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 11(5):571–585PubMedCrossRef Andrich D (2011) Rating scales and Rasch measurement. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 11(5):571–585PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Cano SJ, Browne JP, Lamping DL (2004) Patient-based measures of outcome in plastic surgery: current approaches and future directions. Br J Plast Surg 57(1):1–11PubMedCrossRef Cano SJ, Browne JP, Lamping DL (2004) Patient-based measures of outcome in plastic surgery: current approaches and future directions. Br J Plast Surg 57(1):1–11PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Ching S, Thoma A, McCabe RE, Antony MM (2003) Measuring outcomes in aesthetic surgery: a comprehensive review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg 111(1):469–480 discussion 481-2 PubMedCrossRef Ching S, Thoma A, McCabe RE, Antony MM (2003) Measuring outcomes in aesthetic surgery: a comprehensive review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg 111(1):469–480 discussion 481-2 PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Schwitzer JA, Scott AM, Pusic AL (2015) FACE-Q scales for health-related quality of life, early life impact, satisfaction with outcomes, and decision to have treatment: development and validation. Plast Reconstr Surg 135(2):375–386PubMedCrossRef Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Schwitzer JA, Scott AM, Pusic AL (2015) FACE-Q scales for health-related quality of life, early life impact, satisfaction with outcomes, and decision to have treatment: development and validation. Plast Reconstr Surg 135(2):375–386PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference 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 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
17.
go back to reference Macgregor FC (1981) Patient dissatisfaction with results of technically satisfactory surgery. Aesthet Plast Surg 5(1):27–32CrossRef Macgregor FC (1981) Patient dissatisfaction with results of technically satisfactory surgery. Aesthet Plast Surg 5(1):27–32CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Wright MR (1980) Management of patient dissatisfaction with results of cosmetic procedures. Arch Otolaryngol 106(8):466–471PubMedCrossRef Wright MR (1980) Management of patient dissatisfaction with results of cosmetic procedures. Arch Otolaryngol 106(8):466–471PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Herruer JM, Prins JB, van Heerbeek N, Verhage-Damen GW, Ingels KJ (2015) Negative predictors for satisfaction in patients seeking facial cosmetic surgery: a systematic review. Plast Reconstr Surg 135(6):1596–1605PubMedCrossRef Herruer JM, Prins JB, van Heerbeek N, Verhage-Damen GW, Ingels KJ (2015) Negative predictors for satisfaction in patients seeking facial cosmetic surgery: a systematic review. Plast Reconstr Surg 135(6):1596–1605PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Rassman WR, Bernstein RM, McClellan R et al (2002) Follicular unit extraction: minimally invasive surgery for hair transplantation. Dermatol Surg 28(8):720–728PubMed Rassman WR, Bernstein RM, McClellan R et al (2002) Follicular unit extraction: minimally invasive surgery for hair transplantation. Dermatol Surg 28(8):720–728PubMed
21.
go back to reference Uebel CO (1991) Micrografts and minigrafts: a new approach for baldness surgery. Ann Plast Surg 27(5):476–487PubMedCrossRef Uebel CO (1991) Micrografts and minigrafts: a new approach for baldness surgery. Ann Plast Surg 27(5):476–487PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Valderas JM, Kotzeva A, Espallargues M et al (2008) The impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: a systematic review of the literature. Qual Life Res 17(2):179–193PubMedCrossRef Valderas JM, Kotzeva A, Espallargues M et al (2008) The impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: a systematic review of the literature. Qual Life Res 17(2):179–193PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Marshall S, Haywood K, Fitzpatrick R (2006) Impact of patient-reported outcome measures on routine practice: a structured review. J Eval Clin Pract 12(5):559–568PubMedCrossRef Marshall S, Haywood K, Fitzpatrick R (2006) Impact of patient-reported outcome measures on routine practice: a structured review. J Eval Clin Pract 12(5):559–568PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Greenhalgh J, Meadows K (1999) The effectiveness of the use of patient-based measures of health in routine practice in improving the process and outcomes of patient care: a literature review. J Eval Clin Pract 5(4):401–416PubMedCrossRef Greenhalgh J, Meadows K (1999) The effectiveness of the use of patient-based measures of health in routine practice in improving the process and outcomes of patient care: a literature review. J Eval Clin Pract 5(4):401–416PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Evaluating the Satisfaction of Patients Undergoing Hair Transplantation Surgery Using the FACE-Q Scales
Authors
Yang Liu
Fang Liu
Qian Qu
Zhe-xiang Fan
Yong Miao
Zhi-qi Hu
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/s00266-018-1292-x

Other articles of this Issue 2/2019

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2/2019 Go to the issue