Advertisement

Quality Assessment of Online Information on Body Contouring Surgery in Postbariatric Patient

  • Federico Lo TortoEmail author
  • Marco Marcasciano
  • Jacopo M. Frattaroli
  • Juste Kaciulyte
  • Francesco L. R. Mori
  • Ugo Redi
  • Donato Casella
  • Emanuele Cigna
  • Diego Ribuffo
Original Article Body Contouring

Abstract

Background

Nowadays, we have to face the fact that the Web represents one of the most important sources of information for patients. Postbariatric patients in particular are usually very motivated, and they are enthusiastic users of the Web as a source of information on the different types of surgery they could undergo after their weight loss in order to reshape and remodel their body thus regaining physical and functional wellness and dignity. The aim of the study was to assess information on the four most commonly performed postbariatric procedures worldwide, tummy tuck, breast, arm and thigh lift, with the same scale.

Methods

Google and Yahoo have been probed for the keywords “Post bariatric Mastopexy OR breast lift” and “Post bariatric abdominoplasty OR tummy tuck” and “Post bariatric brachioplasty OR arm lift” and “post bariatric thigh lift”. The first 50 hits were included, and the quality of information was evaluated with the expanded EQIP scale.

Results

There was a critical lack of information about qualitative risks and side-effect description, treatment of potential complications, alert signs for the patient and precautions that the patient may take. Moreover, there was poor information about the sequence of the medical procedure, quantitative benefits and risks and quality of life issues after the procedure, and often, there were no other sources of information.

Conclusions

Due to the poor and not reliable information offered by the Web, health professionals should seek for a good communication practice with their patients.

Level of Evidence V

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

Postbariatric surgery Online information EQIP scale Quality assessment 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards:

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

For this type of study, informed consent is not required.

References

  1. 1.
    Eurostat statistics. Digital economy and society statistics—households and individuals. Internet access of households, 2013 and 2018. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/index.php/Digital_economy_and_society_statistics_-_households_and_individuals. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
  2. 2.
    National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Overweight & Obesity Statistics. https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statistics/overweightobesity. Accessed 4 Aug 2019
  3. 3.
    World Health Organization. Data and statistics. The challenge of obesity—quick statistics. http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/noncommunicable-diseases/obesity/data-andstatistics. Accessed 4 Aug 2019.
  4. 4.
    Wolfe BM, Kvach E, Eckel RH (2016) Treatment of obesity: weight loss and bariatric surgery. Circ Res 118:1844–1855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Plastic Surgery Statistics Reports. 2017. https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2017/plastic-surgery-statistics-fullreport-2017.pdf. Accessed 4 Aug 2019
  6. 6.
    ISAPS international survey on aesthetic/cosmetic procedures performed in 2017. https://www.isaps.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ISAPS_2017_International_Study_Cosmetic_Procedures_NEW.pdf. Accessed Oct 19 2019.
  7. 7.
    Marcasciano M, Frattaroli J, Mori FLR et al (2019) The new trend of pre-pectoral breast reconstruction: an objective evaluation of the quality of online information for patients undergoing breast reconstruction. Aesthetic Plast Surg 43:593–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Palma AF, Zuk G, Raptis DA et al (2016) Quality of information for women seeking breast augmentation in the Internet. J Plast Surg Hand Surg 50:262–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lynch NP, Lang B, Angelov S et al (2017) Breast reconstruction post mastectomy—Let’s Google it. Accessibility, readability and quality of online information. Breast 32:126–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    eBizMBA. Top 15 most popular search engines: May 2018. http://www.ebizmba.com/articles/search-engines website. Accessed Nov 2018.
  11. 11.
    Eysenbach G, Köhler C (2002) How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ 324:573–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    World Health Organization. Obesity and Overweight. https://www.who.int/newsroom/fact-sheets/detail/obesity-and-overweight. Accessed 16 June 2019.
  13. 13.
    Rangel-Huerta OD, Pastor-Villaescusa B, Gil A (2019) Are we close to defining a metabolomic signature of human obesity? A systematic review of metabolomics studies. Metabolomics 15:93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ficaro I (2018) Surgical weight loss as a life-changing transition: The impact of interpersonal relationships on post bariatric women. Appl Nurs Res 40:7–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rosa SC, Macedo JLS, Casulari LA, Canedo LR, Marques JVA (2018) Anthropometric and clinical profiles of post-bariatric patients submitted to procedures in plastic surgery. Rev Col Bras Cir 45:e1613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kinzl JF, Traweger C, Trefalt E, Biebl W (2003) Psychosocial consequences of weight loss following gastric banding for morbid obesity. Obes Surg 13:105–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    De Kerviler S, Hüsler R, Banic A, Constantinescu MA (2009) Body contouring surgery following bariatric surgery and dietetically induced massive weight reduction: a risk analysis. Obes Surg 19:553–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wilhelm L, Hartmann AS, Becker JC, Kisi M, Waldorf M, Vocks S (2019) Thin media images decrease women’s body satisfaction: comparisons between veiled muslim women, christian women and atheist women regarding trait and state body image. Front Psychol 10:1074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Diaz JA, Griffith RA, Ng JJ, Reinert SE, Friedmann PD, Moulton AW (2002) Patients’ use of the Internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med 17:180–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wald HS, Dube CE, Anthony DC (2007) Untangling the Web—the impact of Internet use on health care and the physician–patient relationship. Patient Educ Couns 68:218–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tijerina JD, Morrison SD, Nolan IT, Vail DG, Lee GK, Nazerali R (2019) Analysis and interpretation of Google trends data on public interest in cosmetic body procedures. Aesthet Surg JGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kitzinger HB, Abayev S, Pittermann A et al (2012) After massive weight loss: patients’ expectations of body contouring surgery. Obes Surg 22:544–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pajula S, Jyränki J, Tukiainen E, Koljonen V (2019) Complications after lower body contouring surgery due to massive weight loss unaffected by weight loss method. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 72:649–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zerini I, Sisti A, Barberi L et al (2016) Body contouring surgery: our 5 years experience. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 4:e649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Xia Y, Zhao J, Cao DS (2019) Safety of lipoabdominoplasty versus abdominoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg 43:167–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sisti A, Cuomo R, Milonia L et al (2018) Complications associated with brachioplasty: a literature review. Acta Biomed. 88:393–402PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sisti A, Cuomo R, Zerini I et al (2015) Complications associated with medial thigh lift: a comprehensive literature review. J Cutan Aesthet Surg 8:191–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Carmichael SP 2nd, Veasey EC, Davenport DL, Jay K, Bernard AC (2018) Patient-surgeon relationship influences outcomes in bariatric patients. Am Surg 84:1850–1855PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Federico Lo Torto
    • 1
    Email author
  • Marco Marcasciano
    • 1
  • Jacopo M. Frattaroli
    • 1
  • Juste Kaciulyte
    • 1
  • Francesco L. R. Mori
    • 1
  • Ugo Redi
    • 1
  • Donato Casella
    • 1
  • Emanuele Cigna
    • 2
  • Diego Ribuffo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Surgery “P.Valdoni”, Unit of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Policlinico Umberto ISapienza University of RomeRomeItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Ricerca Traslazionale e delle Nuove Tecnologie in Medicina e ChirurgiaUniversità degli Studi di PisaPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations