Background/aim: The study aims to evaluate the usage of gold weight implants and monitor complaints and comfort of patients.Methods: A hundred and ninety-one implantations performed between January 2009 and January 2019 were analyzed. Seventy-eight patients included in this study The average age of the patients was 51.3±14.5 years. Forty-five (57.7%) of them were male and 33 (42.3%) female. Patient satisfaction was measured with a questionnaire containing the most common complaints related to gold weight in the literature through telephone surveys.Results: The average follow-up time was 74,5 months. Ninety-three-point-five percent of subjects had operational causes, among which the most widespread was acoustic neuroma (44.9%). The average time between facial paralysis and implantation was 141,1 days. Implantation was performed 26,6 days on average after acoustic neuroma surgery and 3,2 days on average after temporal zone malignancy surgery. Thirty-eight patients had their implants removed over either complication (n=14) or recovery (n=24).Recovery was the fastest after facial nerve decompression (mean= 4,75±3,6 (2-10) months) and the slowest after 7-12 cranial nerve transfer (mean= 18,3±8,2 (3-31) months). Twenty-six-point-nine percent (n=21) of patients had complications, of which the most common was extrusion (n=10). The overall satisfaction rate was 88,5% with the highest in visual acuity and the lowest in continuous requirement for artificial tear. Conclusions:The gold weight implantation is an effective, reversible, and easy procedure significantly reducing complaints regarding paralytic lagophthalmos. Early implementation may be beneficial for ocular complications. A dynamic facial reanimation could terminate need of implant.

Objective: To transcribe and validate the Facial Clinimetric Evaluation (FaCE) scale to be able to use it in a Turkish-speaking patient population with peripheral facial paralysis (PFP). Material and Methods: The original English FaCE scale was translated according to international guidelines. Then a validation study was conducted on 37 patients with facial paralysis. The patients completed the scale twice at a 1-week interval. Internal consistency was evaluated with the Cronbach alpha coefficient. The correlations between the FaCE scale and the House-Brackmann Grading System (HBGS), the Sunnybrook Grading System (SBGS), and the Facial Disability Index (FDI) scores and structure validity were evaluated by calculating the Spearman rho correlation coefficient. Results: The FaCE scale showed internal consistency with an excellent Cronbach α value of 0.828. Test-retest reliability was shown with an Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) in the range of 0.51-0.95. The FaCE scale was determined to be well correlated with the HBGS and SBGS points (r=-0.51, r=0.65, respectively). The FaCE scale face movement score showed the highest correlation with HBGS (r=-0.61). SBGS had the highest correlation with the oral function score (r=0.61). The study determined there to be a good correlation between the FaCE scale and the social/well-being function and physical function of the FDI (r=0.69, r=0.66, respectively). Conclusion:The FaCE scale is a reliable and valid tool for assessing the quality of life of PFP patients. The Turkısh version of the FaCE Scale showed good psychometric properties. By showing high validity and reliability, the Turkish FaCE scale can be used in Turkish-speaking patients with peripheral facial paralysis.

Background/aim: This study aims to evaluate of olfactory and gustatory functions of COVID-19 patients and possible risk factors for olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions. Materials and Methods:The cross-sectional study included adult patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 in XXXX University Hospital between April 2020 and June 2020.Volunteered patients participated to a survey in which olfactory and gustatory functions and various clinical information were questioned. Sinonasal Outcome Test-22 was also administrated to all patients.Results: A hundred and seventy-one patients participated in this study. Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions rates were 10.5% (n:18) and 10.5% (n:18) respectively. Patients without any symptom other than smell and taste dysfunctions were clustered as group 1 and patients who are clinically symptomatic were clustered as group 2. Olfactory dysfunction occurred in 8% of Group 1 and 17.4% of group 2 (p=0.072). Gustatory dysfunction rate of smokers was 19.7% and significantly higher than gustatory dysfunction rate of non-smokers (5.5%) (p=0.007). Twenty-seven-point-eight percent of the patients with olfactory dysfunction (n=5) were male and 72.2% (n:13) were female. Gender did not show significant effect on rate of olfactory dysfunction. Twenty-five patients participated in psychophysical olfactory function test. No participant reported olfactory dysfunction at the time of test. 64% of the participants (n:16) were normosmic and 36% of the participants (n:9) were hyposmic according to Sniffin' Stick test. Conclusion:Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions are more common in patients who are clinically symptomatic than those diagnosed during filiation. Objective tests may show that 2 frequency of olfactory dysfunction is greater than frequency of self-reported olfactory dysfunction.