Cosmetic and Functional Outcomes of Septorhinoplasty
- 1 Downloads
To find out the improvement in cosmetic and functional aspects as measured using Rhinoplasty outcome evaluation questionnaire following Septorhinoplasty. To measure the increase in nasal airflow as measured using “Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow meter” in patients undergoing Septorhinoplasty. Design: prospective cohort study. Settings: patients with complaints of nasal obstruction and external deformity who are undergoing Septorhinoplasty after evaluation. Subjects: patients undergoing Septorhinoplasty at Pushpagiri Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Thiruvalla during a period of 1½ years, starting from 01/01/2017. Methods: non-random, consecutive sampling. The mean age in this study is 26.10 years. The most common age group of patients who were included in the study was 11–20 years. We had 11 females and 8 males. Female to male ratio was 1.375. The mean duration of symptom was 6.33 years. Most of the patients in our study were students. The mean pre-op ROE score was 29.79 ± 15.28 and post-op score was 87.32 ± 8.75. There was significant improvement in ROE scores following Septorhinoplasty (p < 0.0001). The mean pre-op PNIF score was 76.58 ± 41.37 and post-op score was 125 ± 50.22. There was significant improvement in PNIF scores following surgery (p < 0.0001). There is significant improvement in cosmetic and functional aspects in patients undergoing Septorhinoplasty. There is significant improvement in external appearance and nasal obstruction following Septorhinoplasty. The patient satisfaction following Septorhinoplasty can be measured with ease with the help of Rhinoplasty outcome evaluation questionnaire and Peak nasal inspiratory flow meter.
KeywordsSeptorhinoplasty Rhinoplasty outcome evaluation questionnaire Peak nasal inspiratory flow Cosmetic aspect Functional aspect
No funding was received by any of the authors for this study.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 18.Timperley D, Srubisky A, Stow N, Marcells GN, Harvey RJ (2010) Minimal clinically important differences in nasal peak inspiratory flow. Int Rhinol Soc 31:37–40Google Scholar