Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34027598›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 Surgery2022

Continual rehabilitation motivation of patients with postparalytic facial nerve syndrome.

Maike Osthues, Anna-Maria Kuttenreich, Gerd Fabian Volk, Christian Dobel, Bernhard Strauss, Uwe Altmann, Orlando Guntinas-Lichius

Open access · hybridAbstract read
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, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maike OsthuesDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
Anna-Maria KuttenreichDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
Gerd Fabian VolkDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
Christian DobelDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
Bernhard StraussInstitute of Psychosocial Medicine, Psychotherapy and Psycho-Oncology, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.
Uwe AltmannInstitute of Psychosocial Medicine, Psychotherapy and Psycho-Oncology, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.
Orlando Guntinas-LichiusDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller University Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany. orlando.guntinas@med.uni-jena.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9671-0784
Jena University Hospital · DE

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Technologie IRESTRA 16SV7209Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft GU-463/12-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the continued rehabilitation motivation in patients with postparalytic facial synkinesis (PFS).

methodsIn this single-center cross-sectional survey, the multidimensional patient questionnaire for assessment of rehabilitation motivation (PAREMO-20) was used to assess the rehabilitation motivation. Associations Sunnybrook and Stennert index grading, Facial Clinimetric Evaluation (FaCE) survey, general quality of life (SF-36), Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-9, technology commitment and affinity, and interest in further therapy were analyzed.

results69 adults with PFS (73% women; median age: 54 years) answered the survey. In comparison to prior treatment forms, there was a significant higher future interest in computer-based home facial training (p < 0.0001). For PAREMO Psychological burden subscore, SF36 Emotional role was the highest negative correlative factor (p < 0.0001). For PAREMO Physical burden subscore, SF-36 General health was the highest negative correlative factor (p = 0.018). Working (p = 0.033) and permanent relationship (p = 0.029) were the only independent factors correlated to PAREMO Social Support Subscore. Higher positive impacts of technology affinity was inversely correlated to PAREMO Knowledge subscore (p = 0.017). Lower SF-36 Role physical subscore p = 0.045) and a lower SF-36 General health (p = 0.013) were correlated to a higher PAREMO Skepticism subscore.

conclusionsPatients with PFS seem to have a high facial motor and non-motor psychosocial impairment even after several facial therapies. Rehabilitation-related motivation increases with both, higher facial motor and non-motor dysfunction. Social and emotional dysfunction are drivers to be interested in innovative digital therapy forms.

Indexed as

Facial ParalysisMotivationAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFacial NerveFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality of LifeAnxietyChronic facial palsyDepressionFacial nerveFacial paralysisMotivationPatient reported outcome measureQuality of lifeRehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID34027598
PMCPMC8141409
OpenAlexW3165533738

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.