Application of the FACE-Q rhinoplasty module in a mixed reconstructive and corrective rhinoplasty population in Finland

References

• Amodeo CA. The central role of the nose in the face and the psyche: review of the nose and the psyche. Aesth Plast Surg. 2007;31(4):406–410.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barone M, Cogliandro A, Di Stefano N, et al. A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures after rhinoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017;274(4):1807–1811.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klassen AF, Cano SJ, East CA, et al. Development and psychometric evaluation of the face-Q scales for patients undergoing rhinoplasty. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2016;18(1):27–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• http://Qportfolio.Org/. [cited 2020 July 15]
   Google Scholar
• Lee MK, Most SP. A comprehensive quality-of-life instrument for aesthetic and functional rhinoplasty: the rhino scale. Plastic Reconstruc Surg Global Open. 2016;4(2):e611.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alsarraf R. Outcomes research in facial plastic surgery: a review and new directions. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2000;24(3):192–197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santesso N, Barbara AM, Kamran R, et al. Conclusions from surveys may not consider important biases: a systematic survey of surveys. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;122:108–114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mokkink LB, Prinsen CAC, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW, Terwew CB. COSMIN study design checklist for patient-reported outcome measurement instruments. Version July 2019. www.cosmin.nl
   Google Scholar
• Hindin DI, Muetterties CE, Lee JC, et al. Internal distraction resulted in improved patient-reported outcomes for midface hypoplasia. J Craniofac Surg. 2018;29(1):139–143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elegbede A, Mermulla S, Diaconu SC, et al. Patient-reported outcomes in facial reconstruction: assessment of face-Q scales and predictors of satisfaction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2018;6(12):e2004.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Alakärppä AI, Koskenkorva TJ, Koivunen PT, et al. Quality of life before and after sinonasal surgery: a population-based matched cohort study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017;274(2):795–802.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharma K, Steele K, Birks M, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures in plastic surgery: an introduction and review of clinical applications. Ann Plast Surg. 2019;83(3):247–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Medical Association. World medical association declaration of helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310:2191–2194.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, et al.; ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (Pro) measures: report of the ispor task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value Health. 2005;8(2):94–104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Homsy SPU, Lindford MM, Repo AJ, et al. Finnish translation and validation of the face-Q eye module. Scand J Surg. 2020;1457496920982767. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1457496920982767. Online ahead of print.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Schwitzer JA, et al. Face-Q scales for health-related quality of life, early life impact, satisfaction with outcomes, and decision to have treatment: development and validation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135(2):375–386.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM, et al. Development and psychometric evaluation of the face-q satisfaction with appearance scale: a new patient-reported outcome instrument for facial aesthetics patients. Clin Plast Surg. 2013;40(2):249–260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Team RC. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria; 2020. http://www.r-project.org/index.html
   Google Scholar
• Revelle W. Psych: procedures for personality and psychological research. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University; 2018. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psychVersion=1.8.12.
   Google Scholar
• Stoffel MA, Nakagawa S, Schielzeth H. Rptr: repeatability estimation and variance decomposition by generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods Ecol Evol. 2017;8(11):1639–1644.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LoMartire R. Rel: reliability coefficients. R Package Version 1.4.2. 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Bernaards CA, Jennrich RI. Gradient projection algorithms and software for arbitrary rotation criteria in factor analysis. Educ Psychol Measure. 2005;65(5):676–696.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rizopoulos D. Ltm: an R package for latent variable modeling and item response analysis. J Stat Soft. 2006;17:25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wickham H. Tidyverse: easily install and load the 'Tidyverse'. R package version 1.2.1. 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Guyuron B. Moc-Ps(Sm) Cme article: late cleft lip nasal deformity. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121(4 Suppl):1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Tasman A-J. The psychological aspects of rhinoplasty. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;18(4):290–294.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radulesco T, Mancini J, Penicaud M, et al. Assessing normal values for the face-Q rhinoplasty module: an observational study. Clin Otolaryngol. 2018;43(4):1025–1030.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalaaji A, Dreyer S, Schnegg J, et al. Assessment of rhinoplasty outcomes with face-Q rhinoplasty module: norwegian linguistic validation and clinical application in 243 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019;7(9):e2448–e2448.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schwitzer JA, Sher SR, Fan KL, et al. Assessing patient-reported satisfaction with appearance and quality of life following rhinoplasty using the face-Q appraisal scales. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135:830e–837e.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Pusic AL. Face-Q satisfaction with appearance scores from close to 1000 facial aesthetic patients. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137(3):651e–652e.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsangaris E, Wong Riff KWY, Goodacre T, et al. Establishing content validity of the cleft-Q: a new patient-reported outcome instrument for cleft Lip/palate. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017;5(4):e1305.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar