Reporting Outcomes and Outcome Measures in Open Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
AbstractBackgroundComparative studies have shown little statistical difference in outcomes following rhinoplasty, demonstrating near equivalent results across all surgical techniques. Cross-study comparisons of these trials are difficult because variation in outcome reporting prevents statistical pooling and analysis.ObjectivesThe authors sought to identify all outcomes and outcome measures used to evaluate postoperative results in rhinoplasty.MethodsAn extensive computerized database search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed; all trials involving n ≥ 20 patients, aged 18 years and older undergoing a primary, open rhinoplasty procedure, were included for review.ResultsOf the 3235 citations initially screened, 72 studies met the stated inclusion criteria. A total of 53 unique outcomes and 55 postoperative outcome measures were identified. Outcomes were divided into 6 unique domains: objective signs, subjective symptom severity, physical function related to activities of daily living, patient satisfaction, surgeon satisfaction, and quality of life. The identified outcome measures consisted of 5 nasal-specific, author-reported instruments; 5 nasal specific, patient-reported instruments; 5 patient-reported, generic instruments; and 40 author-generated instruments. Of the outcome measures identified, the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation, Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22, and FACE-Q were the only instruments to demonstrate adequate validity, reliability, and responsiveness to change in patients who underwent a rhinoplasty procedure.ConclusionsThere is heterogeneity in the outcomes and outcome measures employed to assess postsurgical outcomes following rhinoplasty. A standardized core outcome set is urgently needed to make it possible for future investigators to compare results of various techniques in rhinoplasty surgery.Level of Evidence: 2
