The literature still lacks a review regarding PROs applied for rhinoplasty. Thus, we performed a systematic review of the literature to identify PROMs that assess patient satisfaction and quality of life after rhinoplasty. The aim of our study was to identify existing questionnaires and to summarize their development, psychometric properties, and content. A multi-step search of the web-based PubMed database from the National Library of Medicine was performed to identify PROMs that are designed to evaluate satisfaction and quality of life following rhinoplasty. Each potential PROM was examined by three independent reviewers for adherence to inclusion/exclusion criteria. Questionnaires included in the analysis were appraised for their adherence to international guidelines for the development and validation of health outcome questionnaires, as outlined by the Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcome Trust and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Our search generated a total of 457 articles, 351 that were retrieved in the primary search, and 106 that were found in the references of the first set of articles. The process of development and validation of each of the included PROMs was examined. Only ten of these were identified as surgery-specific questionnaires about rhinoplasty. These were divided into three categories: (1) functional self-assessment (Nasal Surgical Questionnaire, Nasal Obstruction Symptoms Evaluation Scale, and Nasal Obstruction Septoplasty Effectiveness); (2) aesthetic self-assessment (Utrecht Questionnaire, FACE-Q rhinoplasty module, Glasgow Benefit Inventory); and (3) aesthetic and functional self-assessment (Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation), Functional Rhinoplasty Outcome Inventory 17, RHINO Scale, and Evaluation of Aesthetic Rhinoplasty Scale).

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 .

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate changes of signs and symptoms in patients with meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) treated with intense regulated pulsed light (IRPL), and to further investigate which parameter could predict positive outcomes of the procedure. Twenty-eight patients who bilaterally received three IRPL sessions at day 1, 15, and 45 satisfied the criteria and were included in the study. Non-invasive break-up time (NIBUT), lipid layer thickness (LLT), meibography, tear osmolarity, and ocular discomfort symptoms were measured before and 30 days after the last IRPL session. Qualified or complete success was defined in the presence of an improvement of symptoms associated with an increase of NIBUT (< or ≥ 20%). After IRPL treatment, median NIBUT and LLT increased from 7.5 to 10.2 s and 2.0 to 3.0, respectively (p <0.001); tear osmolarity decreased from 304.0 to 301.0 mOsm/L (p = 0.002). Subjective symptoms improved after IRPL in 26 patients. Qualified success was reached in 34 eyes, while complete success in 16 eyes. Patients with lower baseline break-up time (BUT) values showed better response to treatment (p = 0.04). In conclusion, IRPL improved signs and symptoms in MGD patients, while lower baseline NIBUT values were predictive of better response to IRPL.

Summary:Two biases affect the idea of beauty often embodied in aesthetic surgery. The first one is that the living body is the sum of different parts; the second one claims that beauty results from the sum of beautiful elements. Taken together, these 2 biases explain most of the aesthetic surgery procedures, in which a localized improvement is supposed to impact on the whole body image. In this article, I put into question these 2 problematic assumptions, showing that Western and Eastern aesthetics, on one side, and philosophical reflections, on the other side, support a different conception of beauty. In particular, an alternative idea that opens to authenticity and imperfection and focuses on the living body rather than on the mere anatomical surface is proposed here as a more adequate concept of beauty for aesthetic surgery.