Hersant B, Abbou R, SidAhmed-Mezi M, Meningaud J P
Department of Maxillofacial and Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Henri Mondor Hospital, 51 avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, Créteil, 94010, France.
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2016 Aug;40(4):556-65. doi: 10.1007/s00266-016-0640-y. Epub 2016 May 13.
In the field of cosmetic medicine, patient satisfaction is an important and common indicator used to measure the efficacy of the treatment. However, it is insufficient to prove objectively that the benefit of the specific factors involved in the cosmetic outcomes. The practitioner should be aware of these assessment tools, in particular in case of demanding or litigious patients.
The aim of this review was to establish a list and discuss the subjective and objective methods used to assess facial aesthetic rejuvenation treatments.
A systematic literature search was performed using the Pubmed search engine. Studies published over the last 5 years, i.e. between January 2010 and January 2015 were considered for review. The following keywords were used: "aesthetic treatment", "facial rejuvenation", and "subjective evaluation" or "objective evaluation".
Of the 446 articles identified by the search strategy, 47 articles focused specifically on facial rejuvenation and on the efficacy of aesthetic medical treatments were retrieved for review. Thirty-seven articles used quantitative methods to assess aesthetic treatment outcomes and only 12 used subjective methods. The different assessment methods were listed according to the tools used and treatment indications.
This review will help in choosing adequate methods to assess facial rejuvenation medical treatment. It is important to combine these tools adequately to improve the assessment. There is no current consensus on assess facial rejuvenation treatments but we noted that objective assessment methods seem helpful.
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 .
在美容医学领域，患者满意度是用于衡量治疗效果的一项重要且常用指标。然而，这不足以客观证明美容效果中所涉及的特定因素的益处。从业者应了解这些评估工具，尤其是在面对要求苛刻或爱打官司的患者时。
本综述的目的是列出并讨论用于评估面部美容年轻化治疗的主观和客观方法。
使用PubMed搜索引擎进行系统的文献检索。考虑对过去5年（即2010年1月至2015年1月）发表的研究进行综述。使用了以下关键词：“美容治疗”、“面部年轻化”以及“主观评估”或“客观评估”。
通过检索策略识别出的446篇文章中，有47篇专门关注面部年轻化以及美容医学治疗效果的文章被检索出来以供综述。37篇文章使用定量方法评估美容治疗效果，只有12篇使用主观方法。根据所使用的工具和治疗适应症列出了不同的评估方法。
本综述将有助于选择适当的方法来评估面部年轻化医学治疗。充分结合这些工具以改进评估非常重要。目前在评估面部年轻化治疗方面尚无共识，但我们注意到客观评估方法似乎很有帮助。
本期刊要求作者为每篇文章指定证据级别。有关这些循证医学评级的完整描述，请参阅目录或在线作者指南www.springer.com/00266 。
