Denadai Rafael, Chou Pang-Yun, Su Yu-Ying, Lo Chi-Chin, Lin Hsiu-Hsia, Ho Cheng-Ting, Lo Lun-Jou
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Craniofacial Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan.
Department of Craniofacial Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan.
J Clin Med. 2019 Jun 25;8(6):909. doi: 10.3390/jcm8060909.
Outcome measures reported by patients, clinicians, and lay-observers can help to tailor treatment plans to meet patients' needs. This study evaluated orthognathic surgery (OGS) outcomes using pre- and post-OGS patients' ( = 84) FACE-Q reports, and a three-dimensional facial photograph-based panel assessment of facial appearance and psychosocial parameters, with 96 blinded layperson and orthodontic and surgical professional raters, and verified whether there were correlations between these outcome measurement tools. Post-OGS FACE-Q and panel assessment measurements showed significant ( < 0.001) differences from pre-OGS measurements. Pre-OGS patients' FACE-Q scores were significantly ( < 0.01) lower than normal, age-, gender-, and ethnicity-matched individuals' ( = 54) FACE-Q scores, with no differences in post-OGS comparisons. The FACE-Q overall facial appearance scale had a low, statistically significant ( < 0.001) correlation to the facial-aesthetic-based panel assessment, but no correlation to the FACE-Q lower face and lips scales. No significant correlation was observed between the FACE-Q and panel assessment psychosocial-related scales. This study demonstrates that OGS treatment positively influences the facial appearance and psychosocial-related perceptions of patients, clinicians and lay observers, but that there is only a low, or no, correlation between the FACE-Q and panel assessment tools. Future investigations may consider the inclusion of both tools as OGS treatment endpoints for the improvement of patient-centered care, and guiding the health-system-related decision-making processes of multidisciplinary teams, policymakers, and other stakeholders.
患者、临床医生和非专业观察者报告的结果指标有助于制定符合患者需求的治疗方案。本研究使用正颌手术(OGS)前后患者(n = 84)的FACE-Q报告,以及基于三维面部照片的面部外观和社会心理参数的小组评估,对96名不知情的非专业人士、正畸和外科专业评估者进行评估,以验证这些结果测量工具之间是否存在相关性。OGS后的FACE-Q和小组评估测量结果与OGS前的测量结果存在显著差异(P < 0.001)。OGS前患者的FACE-Q评分显著低于正常、年龄、性别和种族匹配个体(n = 54)的FACE-Q评分(P < 0.01),OGS后比较无差异。FACE-Q整体面部外观量表与基于面部美学的小组评估存在低水平的统计学显著相关性(P < 0.001),但与FACE-Q下面部和嘴唇量表无相关性。FACE-Q与小组评估的社会心理相关量表之间未观察到显著相关性。本研究表明,OGS治疗对面部外观以及患者、临床医生和非专业观察者的社会心理相关认知有积极影响,但FACE-Q与小组评估工具之间仅存在低相关性或无相关性。未来的研究可能会考虑将这两种工具都纳入作为OGS治疗终点,以改善以患者为中心的护理,并指导多学科团队、政策制定者和其他利益相关者与卫生系统相关的决策过程。