Long-term quality of life changes after primary septorhinoplasty
Health-related quality of life measurements are gaining in importance in clinical medicine. Little is known about the long-term quality of life changes after septorhinoplasty. This study was designed to analyse the long-term quality of life impacts of septorhinoplasty, using disease-specific instruments—rhinoplasty outcome evaluation (ROE) and Functional Rhinoplasty Outcome Inventory-17 (FROI-17); as well as a generic instrument—Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36).
Patients completed the FROI-17, the ROE and the SF-36 preoperatively and at 12 and 60 months postoperatively. General demographic and clinical information (age, gender, allergies, medication, medical and surgical history) were collected from all patients.
We report a significant increase in disease-specific QOL after primary septorhinoplasty (as measured with the ROE & FROI-17) and in two scales of the SF-36 generic instrument (role-functioning physical and mental health) 1 year after surgery. Our patients showed further significant increase in disease-specific QOL (FROI-17) after their primary septorhinoplasty (1 year vs. 5 years postoperatively). SF-36 results showed significant improvements 5 years postoperatively (compared to preoperative scores) in six out of eight scales (physical functioning, role-functioning physical, bodily pain, vitality, social functioning and mental health).
Septorhinoplasty can improve disease-specific and non-disease-specific QOL in the short- and long-term postoperative period. These improvements remain measurable 5 years after surgery.
KeywordsSeptorhinoplasty Rhinoplasty Quality of life ROE SF-36 FROI-17
All authors made substantial contributions to the study. OCB: designed and coordinated the study, participated in the data acquisition and analysis, interpreted the data and drafted the manuscript. FW: participated in the data acquisition and analysis, critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. DO: participated in data interpretation and revision of manuscript MP, CK and ES: participated in the data acquisition and analysis PKP: participated in the data acquisition and analysis, critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content IB: designed and coordinated the study, participated in the data acquisition and analysis, interpreted the data, critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 3.Klassen, A. F., Cano, S. J., East, C. A., Baker, S. B., Badia, L., Schwitzer, J. A., et al. (2016). Development and psychometric evaluation of the FACE-Q scales for patients undergoing rhinoplasty. JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery, 18(1), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2015.1445.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 6.Meningaud, J. P., Lantieri, L., & Bertrand, J. C. (2008). Rhinoplasty: An outcome research. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 121(1), 251–257. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000293866.57517.d4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Schwitzer, J. A., Albino, F. P., Mathis, R. K., Scott, A. M., Gamble, L., & Baker, S. B. (2015). Assessing demographic differences in patient-perceived improvement in facial appearance and quality of life following rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 35(7), 784–793. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjv066.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 21.Flanary, C. M., Barnwell, G. M., VanSickels, J. E., Littlefield, J. H., & Rugh, A. L. (1990). Impact of orthognathic surgery on normal and abnormal personality dimensions: A 2-year follow-up study of 61 patients. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 98(4), 313–322.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar