Advertisement

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

, Volume 42, Issue 6, pp 1635–1647 | Cite as

Systematic Review of Quality-of-Life Measurement After Aesthetic Rhinoplasty

  • Matthias S. WähmannEmail author
  • Olcay C. Bulut
  • Gregor M. Bran
  • Johannes A. Veit
  • Frank Riedel
Original Article Rhinoplasty

Abstract

Introduction

The assessment of outcomes in aesthetic rhinoplasty is highly relevant because patient satisfaction and improved health-related quality of life (QoL) are the predominant factors in determining success. The patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) employed in rhinoplasty research studies are remarkably diverse, thus yielding difficulties with data analysis. The aim of this article is to provide a comprehensive review of the literature to reveal the relevance of the QoL assessment for rhinosurgeons.

Methods

A systematic literature search with the terms “Rhinoplasty” and “Quality of Life” was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar and Cochrane databases. Primarily, all publications related to QoL following aesthetic rhinoplasty between 2002 and 2017 were identified. As a secondary selection, we focused on articles with a prospective study design, a significant cohort size (at least 50 patients) and a follow-up period of at least 6 months after aesthetic rhinoplasty.

Results

A total of 62 PROM studies assessing QoL following aesthetic rhinoplasties were obtained. We ascertained an increasing publication rate of QoL articles over the last 15 years. Only 17 studies satisfied comprehensive inclusion criteria of a high qualitative study selection. The Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation was the most frequently used QoL questionnaire of the secondary selection (70.6%). The total number of 16 various questionnaires exhibit high heterogeneity.

Conclusion

Our data strengthen the increasing importance of the assessment of QoL after rhinoplasty. Despite a lack of reliable publications with considerable heterogeneity and large variability in outcomes, functional-aesthetic rhinoplasty leads to a significant improvement of patient’s health-related QoL.

Level of Evidence II

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.

Keywords

Rhinoplasty Patient satisfaction Systematic review Outcome assessment Quality of life 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors do not have any commercial associations that might pose or create a conflict of interest with information presented in this article.

References

  1. 1.
    Ishii LE, Tollefson TT, Basura GJ et al (2017) Clinical practice guideline: improving nasal form and function after rhinoplasty. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 156:S1–S30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Strahan EJ, Wilson AE, Cressman KE, Buote VM (2006) Comparing to perfection: how cultural norms for appearance affect social comparisons and self-image. Body Image 3:211–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brown Z, Tiggemann M (2016) Attractive celebrity and peer images on Instagram: effect on women’s mood and body image. Body Image 19:37–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clancy CM, Eisenberg JM (1998) Outcomes research: measuring the end results of health care. Science 282:245–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lasch KE, Marquis P, Vigneux M et al (2010) PRO development: rigorous qualitative research as the crucial foundation. Qual Life Res 19:1087–1096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohen WA, Mundy LR, Ballard TN et al (2016) The BREAST-Q in surgical research: a review of the literature 2009–2015. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 69:149–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, Jones DR (1998) Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess 2:1–74PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reeve BB, Wyrwich KW, Wu AW et al (2013) ISOQOL recommends minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures used in patient-centered outcomes and comparative effectiveness research. Qual Life Res 22:1889–1905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Velikova G, Booth L, Smith AB et al (2004) Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 22:714–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bulut C, Wallner F, Plinkert PK, Baumann I (2014) Development and validation of the Functional Rhinoplasty Outcome Inventory 17 (FROI-17). Rhinology 52:315–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Picavet VA, Prokopakis EP, Gabriels L, Jorissen M, Hellings PW (2011) High prevalence of body dysmorphic disorder symptoms in patients seeking rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 128:509–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sena Esteves S, Goncalves Ferreira M, Carvalho Almeida J, Abrunhosa J, Almeida ESC (2017) Evaluation of aesthetic and functional outcomes in rhinoplasty surgery: a prospective study. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 83:552–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cingi C, Songu M, Bal C (2011) Outcomes research in rhinoplasty: body image and quality of life. Am J Rhinol Allergy 25:263–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bulut OC, Wallner F, Hohenberger R, Plinkert PK, Baumann I (2017) Quality of life after primary septorhinoplasty in deviated- and non-deviated nose measured with ROE, FROI-17 and SF-36. Rhinology 55:75–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bulut OC, Wallner F, Oladokun D et al (2017) Long-term quality of life changes after primary septorhinoplasty. Qual Life Res 27:987–991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bulut OC, Wallner F, Plinkert PK, Prochnow S, Kuhnt C, Baumann I (2015) Quality of life after septorhinoplasty measured with the Functional Rhinoplasty Outcome Inventory 17 (FROI-17). Rhinology 53:54–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Timperley D, Stow N, Srubiski A, Harvey R, Marcells G (2010) Functional outcomes of structured nasal tip refinement. Arch Facial Plast Surg 12:298–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Barone M, Cogliandro A, Di Stefano N, Tambone V, Persichetti P (2017) A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures after rhinoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 274:1807–1811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Picavet VA, Gabriels L, Grietens J, Jorissen M, Prokopakis EP, Hellings PW (2013) Preoperative symptoms of body dysmorphic disorder determine postoperative satisfaction and quality of life in aesthetic rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 131:861–868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Spiekermann C, Rudack C, Stenner M (2017) Reliability and validity of the German version of the Utrecht Questionnaire for Outcome Assessment in Aesthetic Rhinoplasty (D-OAR). Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 274:3893–3898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    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 132:913e–923eCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lohuis PJ, Datema FR (2015) Patient satisfaction in Caucasian and Mediterranean open rhinoplasty using the tongue-in-groove technique: prospective statistical analysis of change in subjective body image in relation to nasal appearance following aesthetic rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 125:831–836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schwitzer JA, Sher SR, Fan KL, Scott AM, Gamble L, Baker SB (2015) Assessing patient-reported satisfaction with appearance and quality of life following rhinoplasty using the FACE-Q appraisal scales. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:830e–837eCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Alsarraf R (2000) Outcomes research in facial plastic surgery: a review and new directions. Aesthetic Plast Surg 24:192–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Alsarraf R, Larrabee WF Jr, Anderson S, Murakami CS, Johnson CM Jr (2001) Measuring cosmetic facial plastic surgery outcomes: a pilot study. Arch Facial Plast Surg 3:198–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cingi C, Eskiizmir G, Cakli H (2012) Comparative analysis of primary and secondary rhinoplasties according to surgeon’s perspective, patient satisfaction, and quality of life. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 121:322–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    AlHarethy S, Al-Angari SS, Syouri F, Islam T, Jang YJ (2017) Assessment of satisfaction based on age and gender in functional and aesthetic rhinoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 274:2809–2812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Moubayed SP, Ioannidis JPA, Saltychev M, Most SP (2018) The 10-item Standardized Cosmesis and Health Nasal Outcomes Survey (SCHNOS) for functional and cosmetic rhinoplasty. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 20:37–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pavri S, Zhu VZ, Steinbacher DM (2016) Postoperative Edema resolution following rhinoplasty: a three-dimensional morphometric assessment. Plast Reconstr Surg 138:973e–979eCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hellings PW, Nolst Trenite GJ (2007) Long-term patient satisfaction after revision rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 117:985–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Honigman RJ, Phillips KA, Castle DJ (2004) A review of psychosocial outcomes for patients seeking cosmetic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 113:1229–1237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Felix GA, de Brito MJ, Nahas FX et al (2014) Patients with mild to moderate body dysmorphic disorder may benefit from rhinoplasty. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 67:646–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bulut OC, Wallner F, Oladokun D, Plinkert PK, Baumann I, Hohenberger R (2018) Patients screening positive for body dysmorphic disorder show no significant health-related quality of life gain after functional septorhinoplasty at a Tertiary Referral Center. Facial Plast Surg 34:318–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yang F, Liu Y, Xiao H, Li Y, Cun H, Zhao Y (2017) Evaluation of preoperative and postoperative patient satisfaction and quality of life in patients undergoing rhinoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 141:603–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Guyuron B, Bokhari F (1996) Patient satisfaction following rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 20:153–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    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 57:123–129PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Draper MR, Salam MA, Kumar S (2007) Change in health status after rhinoplasty. J Otolaryngol 36:13–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Meningaud JP, Lantieri L, Bertrand JC (2008) Rhinoplasty: an outcome research. Plast Reconstr Surg 121:251–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Baumann I (2010) Quality of life before and after septoplasty and rhinoplasty. GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 9:Doc06PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Chauhan N, Warner J, Adamson PA (2010) Adolescent rhinoplasty: challenges and psychosocial and clinical outcomes. Aesthetic Plast Surg 34:510–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Faidiga GB, Carenzi LR, Yassuda CC et al (2010) Long-term evaluation in aesthetic rhinoplasty in an academic referral center. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 76:437–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pecorari G, Gramaglia C, Garzaro M et al (2010) Self-esteem and personality in subjects with and without body dysmorphic disorder traits undergoing cosmetic rhinoplasty: preliminary data. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 63:493–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Yu K, Kim A, Pearlman SJ (2010) Functional and aesthetic concerns of patients seeking revision rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg 12:291–297PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Arima LM, Velasco LC, Tiago RS (2011) Crooked nose: outcome evaluations in rhinoplasty. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 77:510–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    de Lima Ramos S, Hochman B, Gomes HC et al (2011) Effect of nasal deviation on quality of life. Plast Reconstr Surg 128:132–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Fatemi MJ, Rajabi F, Moosavi SJ, Soltani M (2012) Quality of life among Iranian adults before and after rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 36:448–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Arima LM, Velasco LC, Tiago RS (2012) Influence of age on rhinoplasty outcomes evaluation: a preliminary study. Aesthetic Plast Surg 36:248–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lohuis PJ, Faraj-Hakim S, Knobbe A, Duivesteijn W, Bran GM (2012) Split hump technique for reduction of the overprojected nasal dorsum: a statistical analysis on subjective body image in relation to nasal appearance and nasal patency in 97 patients undergoing aesthetic rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg 14:346–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Saleh AM, Younes A, Friedman O (2012) Cosmetics and function: quality-of-life changes after rhinoplasty surgery. Laryngoscope 122:254–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sinno H, Izadpanah A, Thibaudeau S et al (2012) The impact of living with a functional and aesthetic nasal deformity after primary rhinoplasty: a utility outcomes score assessment. Ann Plast Surg 69:431–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    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 38:136–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Cingi C, Toros SZ, Cakli H, Gurbuz MK (2013) Patient-reported outcomes after endonasal rhinoplasty for the long nose. J Craniofac Surg 24:1002–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Lavinsky-Wolff M, Dolci JE, Camargo HL Jr et al (2013) Vertical dome division: a quality-of-life outcome study. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 148:758–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Won TB, Park KT, Moon SJ et al (2013) The effect of septorhinoplasty on quality of life and nasal function in Asians. Ann Plast Surg 71:40–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Baykal B, Erdim I, Kayhan FT, Oghan F (2014) Comparative analysis of nasal deformities according to patient satisfaction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 72(603):e601–e607Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Gunel C, Omurlu IK (2015) The effect of rhinoplasty on psychosocial distress level and quality of life. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 272:1931–1935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Izu SC, Kosugi EM, Lopes AS et al (2014) Validation of the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire adapted to Brazilian Portuguese. Qual Life Res 23:953–958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    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. Aesthetic Plast Surg 38:615–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Roosenboom J, Hellings PW, Picavet VA et al (2014) Secondary cleft rhinoplasty: impact on self-esteem and quality of life. Plast Reconstr Surg 134:1285–1292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Zojaji R, Keshavarzmanesh M, Arshadi HR, Mazloum Farsi Baf M, Esmaeelzadeh S (2014) Quality of life in patients who underwent rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 30:593–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Biggs TC, Fraser LR, Ward MJ, Sunkaraneni VS, Harries PG, Salib RJ (2015) Patient reported outcome measures in septorhinoplasty surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 97:63–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Schwitzer JA, Albino FP, Mathis RK, Scott AM, Gamble L, Baker SB (2015) Assessing demographic differences in patient-perceived improvement in facial appearance and quality of life following rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 35:784–793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Baser E, Kocagoz GD, Calim OF, Verim A, Yilmaz F, Ozturan O (2016) Assessment of patient satisfaction with evaluation methods in open technique septorhinoplasty. J Craniofac Surg 27:420–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Bulut OC, Plinkert PK, Wallner F, Baumann I (2016) Quality of life in functional rhinoplasty: rhinoplasty outcomes evaluation German version (ROE-D). Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 273:2569–2573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Klassen AF, Cano SJ, East CA et al (2016) Development and psychometric evaluation of the FACE-Q scales for patients undergoing rhinoplasty. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 18:27–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Kucur C, Kuduban O, Ozturk A et al (2016) Psychological evaluation of patients seeking rhinoplasty. Eurasian J Med 48:102–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Lee MK, Most SP (2016) A comprehensive quality-of-life instrument for aesthetic and functional rhinoplasty: the RHINO scale. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 4:e611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Yeung A, Hassouneh B, Kim DW (2016) Outcome of nasal valve obstruction after functional and aesthetic-functional rhinoplasty. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 18:128–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Barone M, Cogliandro A, Cassotta G et al (2017) Rhinoplasty in elderly patients: analysis of outcomes and patient’s satisfaction following 20 years experiences. Eur J Plast Surg.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00238-017-1387-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Bulut OC, Wallner F, Oladokun D et al (2018) Long-term quality of life changes after primary septorhinoplasty. Qual Life Res 27:987–991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    de Moura BH, Migliavacca RO, Lima RK et al (2018) Partial inferior turbinectomy in rhinoseptoplasty has no effect in quality-of-life outcomes: a randomized clinical trial. Laryngoscope 128:57–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Herruer JM, Prins JB, van Heerbeek N, Verhage-Damen G, Ingels K (2018) Does self-consciousness of appearance influence postoperative satisfaction in rhinoplasty? J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 71:79–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Hosseinzadeh K, Hamadzadeh H, Khorasani M, Jamshidi M (2017) Health-related quality of life of persons after rhinoplasty: a longitudinal study among Iranian population. J Clin Diagn Res 11:ZC60–ZC62PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Kotzampasakis D, Piniara A, Themelis S et al (2017) Quality of life of patients who underwent aesthetic rhinoplasty: 100 cases assessed with the Glascow Benefit Inventory. Laryngoscope 127:2017–2025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Niehaus R, Kovacs L, Machens HG, Herschbach P, Papadopulos NA (2017) Quality of life-changes after rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 33:530–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Pereira Nunes D, Tinoco C, Oliveira ECD, Paco J (2017) Intermediate osteotomies in rhinoplasty: a new perspective. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 274:2953–2958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Rosa F, Lohuis P, Almeida J et al (2017) The Portuguese version of “The Utrecht Questionnaire for outcome assessment in aesthetic rhinoplasty”: validation and clinical application. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjorl.2017.11.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Radulesco T, Penicaud M, Santini L, Thomassin JM, Dessi P, Michel J (2018) Outcomes of septorhinoplasty: a new approach comparing functional and aesthetic results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 47:175–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Yang F, Liu Y, Xiao H, Li Y, Cun H, Zhao Y (2018) Evaluation of preoperative and postoperative patient satisfaction and quality of life in patients undergoing rhinoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 141:603–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Younes A, Friedman O (2017) Cosmetics and function: quality of life after rhinoplasty. Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery 143:P149–P150CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.HNO-Zentrum Rhein-NeckarMannheimGermany
  2. 2.Department of OtorhinolaryngologySLK-Kliniken HeilbronnHeilbronnGermany
  3. 3.Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck SurgeryUniversitaetsklinikum MannheimMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations