ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024
A Systematic Review of Questionnaires Assessing Patient Satisfaction in Plastic Surgery: Tools, Topics, and Surgical Types.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patient satisfaction is crucial for evaluating healthcare services, including plastic surgery. This systematic review aims to analyze questionnaires assessing patient satisfaction in plastic surgery, identifying their strengths and weaknesses to improve outcomes and enhance the quality of care. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using electronic databases. Studies were included if they were original research articles, written in English, and focused on patient satisfaction questionnaires in plastic surgery. Data extraction and descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Results: A total of 105 studies were included. General/overall satisfaction was the most common topic addressed (99.04%). Cosmetic outcomes were the most frequently assessed category (34.3%). Breast reconstruction was the most common procedure (33.3%). Most studies used a combination of generic and procedure-specific questionnaires (45.71%). The most frequently used measurement tools were BREAST-Q and self-developed questionnaires, each accounting for 28.57% and 27.61%. Conclusions: This review provides a comprehensive analysis of patient satisfaction questionnaires in plastic surgery, emphasizing the importance of a holistic approach and well-established, validated tools. The findings contribute to improving plastic surgery outcomes and enhancing the quality of care. Future research should refine assessment tools to address patients' needs and promote patient-centered outcomes in plastic surgery.
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.