Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28815302›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2017

Reliability and validity of the German version of the Utrecht Questionnaire for Outcome Assessment in Aesthetic Rhinoplasty (D-OAR).

Christoph Spiekermann, Claudia Rudack, Markus Stenner

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Christoph SpiekermannDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany. christophOtto.Spiekermann@ukmuenster.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0775-2788
Claudia RudackDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
Markus StennerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The outcome of aesthetic rhinoplasty is determined by the patient's subjective satisfaction with the nasal appearance which is difficult to assess. The Utrecht Questionnaire for Outcome Assessment in Aesthetic Rhinoplasty (OAR) is a brief and reliable instrument to assess the influence of the subjective nasal appearance on quality of life in patients undergoing aesthetic rhinoplasty. Preoperative application of this questionnaire reveals important aspects and possible disturbances of the body image which could be negative predictors concerning the result. On the other hand, it represents an appropriate tool to assess the postoperative outcome. The aim of this study was to determine the validity, reliability and responsiveness of the adapted German version of the OAR (D-OAR). The adaption of the OAR to German language was performed by a forward and backward translation process. Patients undergoing rhinoplasty were asked to complete the D-OAR preoperatively, 1, 3 and 12 months after procedure and healthy volunteers without any nasal complaints served as controls to test validity, reliability and responsiveness. An excellent internal consistency, a good test-retest reliability and good inter-item and item-total correlations demonstrated a good reliability of the D-OAR. The convincing validity of the adapted version was proven by an excellent discriminant and a sufficient content validity. Significant differences between pre- and postoperative D-OAR scores revealed a good responsiveness of the instrument. Hence, with a sufficient validity, reliability and sensitivity to changes, the D-OAR is a short and helpful instrument to assess the subjective perception of the nasal appearance in German patients.

Indexed as

EstheticsOutcome Assessment, Health CareQuality of LifeRhinoplastySurveys and QuestionnairesAdolescentAdultFemaleGermanyHumansLanguageMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionPerceptionProspective StudiesBody imageOutcomePersonal satisfactionQuality of lifeQuestionnaireRhinoplasty

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.