Measuring Patient-Reported Outcomes in Facial Aesthetic Patients: Development of the FACE-Q

Abstract

To support the development of new techniques and technology in facial aesthetics, sophisticated ways of measuring outcomes are needed. The objective of this study was to develop the content of a set of patient-reported outcome (PRO) scales for use with facial aesthetic patients. A literature review, patient interviews, and input from experts working with facial aesthetic patients were used to develop a conceptual framework for the outcomes deemed important to facial aesthetic patients and to construct items and a set of preliminary PRO scales. The conceptual framework includes the following themes: satisfaction with facial appearance; health-related quality of life; recovery, early life impact, and adverse effects; and satisfaction with process of care. Separate scales were developed for all parts of the face (e.g., nose, ears, forehead, cheeks, etc.) rather than for particular facial procedures. This new PRO instrument, called the FACE-Q, contains multiple independently scoreable scales with preoperative and postoperative versions. Once psychometric evaluation is completed, the FACE-Q will provide researchers and physicians with the necessary tools to measure the impact and effectiveness of facial aesthetic procedures from the patients' perspective. The FACE-Q has the potential to support advocacy, quality metrics, and an evidence-based approach to facial aesthetic practice.

Surgical management of facial nerve paralysis in the pediatric population

“…The authors conclude that this survey technique can be used to study the efficacy and outcomes of breast surgery from the patient's perspective. Of note, currently under development is a similar questionnaire that examines patient-reported outcomes after facial reconstruction: the FACE-Q [108]. This patient satisfaction measure may ultimately lead to a greater understanding of how we can best treat our patients with facial nerve paralysis, both in children and adults.…”

Rationalizing Outcome Measures in Dermatologic Surgery

“…Dermatologic procedures result in color, texture, and contour differences that can be easily appreciated by the naked eye. Patient-reported outcome measures initially developed to assess other medical concerns, like reconstruction after breast cancer surgery, have been adapted for facial procedures, with site-specific subscales [19]. Validation of some of these measures is underway.…”

A Patient-Centered Appraisal of Outcomes following Abdominal Wall Reconstruction

“…Validated by a global quality-of-life assessment tool such as the Short Form Health Surveys (Short Form-8, Short Form-12, Short Form-36), assessment of breast and cosmetic surgery utilizing the BREAST-Q, FACE-Q, and a more recent questionnaire designed to assess outcomes after rhinoplasty has been successfully implemented by the plastic surgery community. [36][37][38][39] Multiple assessments specific to abdominal wall defects and repair already exist in the HerQLes, Carolina Comfort Scale, and Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index questionnaires. The Carolina Comfort Scale is limited to use in repairs that incorporate a mesh and fails to address social impact and patient satisfaction; HerQLes lacks validation in multiple studies and is relatively novel; and the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index falls short in its disease-specific assessment, as abdominal wall procedures are not commonly determined to be successful by gastrointestinal quiescence.…”