ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2024
A Prospective Investigation of Patient Satisfaction and Psychosocial Status Following Facial Bone Contouring Surgery using the Face-Q.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hemostatic net in cervical and facial surgeries: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2026Pooled it
- The Correlation Between Preoperative Psychological State and Postoperative Satisfaction in Aesthetic Surgery: A Comprehensive Review.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Review
- Synergistic Triad of Mixed Reality, 3D Printing, and Navigation in Complex Craniomaxillofacial Reconstruction.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Commentary on: The Role of Nasal Fat Preservation in Upper Lid Surgery and Assessment With the FACE-Q Questionnaire: Innovations in Upper Blepharoplasty.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to assess satisfaction and psychosocial status before and after facial bone contouring surgery using the Face-Q.
methodsThe Face-Q, a multimodular patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument, comprises independently functioning scales and checklists designed to assess outcomes in facial aesthetic patients. A prospective cohort study was conducted from November 2020 to May 2022. Participants undergoing facial bone contouring surgery (reduction mandibuloplasty and/or malarplasty) were asked to complete the Face-Q preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively. Comparative analyses were conducted using normative Face-Q data from 534 matched normal individuals. Face-Q scores were evaluated for each domain on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction with appearance or a superior quality of life.
resultsA total of 284 patients (274 female and 10 male) completed the Face-Q preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively. Of these, 146 underwent reduction mandibuloplasty, 18 underwent malarplasty, and 120 underwent both procedures. Post-surgery, patients experienced significant improvements in overall appearance, features altered by surgery, and quality of life, excluding the patient-perceived age. Preoperatively, patients demonstrated significantly lower scores compared to normative data, with scores significantly increasing postoperatively to levels representative of the general population. Satisfaction with outcome was significantly correlated with postoperative Face-Q measurements but not preoperatively.
conclusionFacial bone contouring surgery significantly improves the satisfaction and quality of life in patients with square faces, reaching a level at least equivalent to the normative population. The use of Face-Q should be highlighted in the clinic practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.