Aesthetics Assessment and Patient Reported Outcome of Nasolabial Aesthetics in 18-Year-Old Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip. (September 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Mulder, Frans J.; Mosmuller, David G. M.; de Vet, Riekie H. C. W.; Don Griot, J. P. W.
• Is Part Of: Cleft palate-craniofacial journal. Volume 56:Number 8(2019)
• Page Start: 1058
• Page End: 1064
• Publication Date: 2019-09
• Subjects: cleft lip -- cleft palate -- aesthetics -- patient reported outcome measures -- self-assessment; Cleft palate -- Periodicals; Skull -- Abnormalities -- Periodicals; Cranial manipulation -- Periodicals; Skull -- Abnormalities -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Face -- Abnormalities -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Fente palatine -- Périodiques; Crâne -- Malformations -- Périodiques; Manipulation crânienne -- Périodiques; Crâne -- Malformations -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Face -- Malformations -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Cleft palate; Cranial manipulation; Face -- Abnormalities -- Surgery; Skull -- Abnormalities; Skull -- Abnormalities -- Surgery; Cleft Lip; Cleft Palate; Facial Bones -- abnormalities; Skull -- abnormalities; Periodicals; Periodicals; Periodicals; 617.522
• DOI: 10.1177/1055665619832439
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1055-6656

Abstract

Objective: To determine if there is a correlation between objective nasolabial aesthetics assessment using the Cleft Aesthetic Rating Scale (CARS) and patient satisfaction. Design: Retrospective analysis of a generic satisfaction questionnaire and independent assessment by three cleft surgeons of the nasolabial area of these patients on 2D frontal photographs, using the CARS. Setting: The Vrije Universiteit Medical Center and The Academic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam. Patients: Thirty-nine 18-year old patients with a repaired complete or incomplete unilateral cleft lip, with or without a cleft palate, and a completed satisfaction questionnaire. Exclusion criteria were an incomplete questionnaire; a history of facial trauma; and congenital syndromes affecting facial appearance. Main Outcome Measures: The correlation between surgeon evaluation (on a 5-point Likert scale) and patient satisfaction (not, moderately or very satisfied) on nasolabial appearance was assessed using Spearman rho (ρ). Results: There was a negligible correlation between surgeon evaluation and patient satisfaction on nose assessment (ρ = 0.20) and a moderate correlation on lip assessment (ρ = 0.32). Conclusions: Most literature supports this discrepancy between different objective aesthetics evaluation methods and subjective patient-reported outcome measures, suggesting there are factors playing a role in patient satisfaction that are impossible to objectify with assessment methods. Therefore, a strong emphasis should remain on clear communication between the physician and patient regarding their expectations, perception, and satisfaction of surgery results.