Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Assessing aesthetic outcomes after trigonocephaly correction


Metzler, Philipp; Zemann, Wolfgang; Jacobsen, Christine; Lübbers, Heinz-Theo; Grätz, Klaus Wilhelm; Obwegeser, Joachim Anton (2014). Assessing aesthetic outcomes after trigonocephaly correction. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 18(2):181-186.

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study analysed the aesthetic outcome assessments after trigonocephaly correction using different assessor groups. METHODS: Twenty-four patients (9 males, 15 females) with a surgical age between 8 and 10 months were included. Standardised photographs showing different facial views of the patients between ages 3 and 6 years were evaluated in terms of aesthetics by three study groups: surgeons, medical students, and lay persons. Each photograph was scored as follows: 1 (normal), 2 (acceptable, no need for revision), or 3 (unacceptable, needs revision). RESULTS: The mean surgical age was 9.1 ±0.4 months. Based on the en-face images, the mean scores assigned by the surgeon, student, and lay groups were 1.4 ±0.49, 1.25 ±0.44, and 1.13 ±0.34, respectively. Based on the patients' profiles, the mean scores assigned by the surgeon, student, and lay groups were 1.37 ±0.49, 1.16 ±0.37, and 1.09 ±0.29, respectively. The scores of the hemi-profile evaluation were 1.14 ±0.35, 1.07 ±0.26, and 1.09 ±0.31, respectively. The scores of the frontal region were 1.47 ±0.54, 1.33 ±0.49, and 1.39 ±0.49, respectively. Within the orbital area, the surgeon, student, and lay groups assigned mean scores of 1.53 ±0.56, 1.29 ±0.46, and 1.15 ±0.36, respectively. The midface analysis showed mean scores of 1.8 ±0.66, 1.63 ±0.52, and 1.46 ±0.5, respectively. In all areas, there were significant differences (P < 0.05) among the assessor groups. CONCLUSION: The expectations regarding aesthetic outcome differ considerably between experts and non-experts. The need for correction did not concern the reshaped bone but rather the soft tissue epicanthal area.

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study analysed the aesthetic outcome assessments after trigonocephaly correction using different assessor groups. METHODS: Twenty-four patients (9 males, 15 females) with a surgical age between 8 and 10 months were included. Standardised photographs showing different facial views of the patients between ages 3 and 6 years were evaluated in terms of aesthetics by three study groups: surgeons, medical students, and lay persons. Each photograph was scored as follows: 1 (normal), 2 (acceptable, no need for revision), or 3 (unacceptable, needs revision). RESULTS: The mean surgical age was 9.1 ±0.4 months. Based on the en-face images, the mean scores assigned by the surgeon, student, and lay groups were 1.4 ±0.49, 1.25 ±0.44, and 1.13 ±0.34, respectively. Based on the patients' profiles, the mean scores assigned by the surgeon, student, and lay groups were 1.37 ±0.49, 1.16 ±0.37, and 1.09 ±0.29, respectively. The scores of the hemi-profile evaluation were 1.14 ±0.35, 1.07 ±0.26, and 1.09 ±0.31, respectively. The scores of the frontal region were 1.47 ±0.54, 1.33 ±0.49, and 1.39 ±0.49, respectively. Within the orbital area, the surgeon, student, and lay groups assigned mean scores of 1.53 ±0.56, 1.29 ±0.46, and 1.15 ±0.36, respectively. The midface analysis showed mean scores of 1.8 ±0.66, 1.63 ±0.52, and 1.46 ±0.5, respectively. In all areas, there were significant differences (P < 0.05) among the assessor groups. CONCLUSION: The expectations regarding aesthetic outcome differ considerably between experts and non-experts. The need for correction did not concern the reshaped bone but rather the soft tissue epicanthal area.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics

Altmetrics

Downloads

62 downloads since deposited on 02 Dec 2013
26 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Scopus Subject Areas:Health Sciences > Surgery
Health Sciences > Oral Surgery
Health Sciences > Otorhinolaryngology
Language:English
Date:2014
Deposited On:02 Dec 2013 17:14
Last Modified:24 Jan 2022 02:11
Publisher:Springer
ISSN:1865-1550
OA Status:Green
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-013-0399-0
PubMed ID:23417755

Download

Green Open Access

Download PDF  'Assessing aesthetic outcomes after trigonocephaly correction'.
Preview
Content: Published Version
Language: English
Filetype: PDF (Nationallizenz 142-005)
Size: 270kB
View at publisher