ArticleCraniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction2026
Assessing Patient Satisfaction Following Otoplasty: A Social Media Analysis.
Article in Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOtoplasty is a commonly performed cosmetic ear procedure, yet patient-reported outcome data remain limited. This study analyzes otoplasty reviews on RealSelf, a widely used aesthetic review platform that provides insight into patient experiences and outcomes.
methodsA retrospective review of otoplasty-related posts on RealSelf from January 2009 to March 2025 was performed. Reviews were manually screened and coded independently by reviewers. Extracted variables included demographics, procedure location, surgeon specialty, anesthesia type, postoperative pain, satisfaction rating ("Worth It," "Not Worth It," "Not Sure"), cost, motivations for surgery, and reasons for choosing the surgeon.
resultsA total of 615 reviews met inclusion criteria, and 90.7% rated the procedure as "Worth It." Protruding ears were the most common motivation for surgery (55.1%), followed by ear asymmetry (17.0%). Surgeon selection was most influenced by the consultation experience (34.4%), credentials (24.8%), and online reviews (21.6%). Positive surgeon comments emphasized comfort (32.3%), personality (27.9%), and communication (25.1%). Satisfaction was significantly associated with postoperative pain level (
conclusionPatient-reported satisfaction with otoplasty on RealSelf is high and is associated with favorable aesthetic results, improved self-confidence, and positive surgeon-patient interactions. In this cohort, effective communication, realistic expectation setting, and postoperative pain management were central to optimizing the patient experience.
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.