2 research outputs found

    Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in a Facial Reconstruction Case Series Following the Implementation of an Integrated Craniofacial Multidisciplinary Team Clinic, Three-Dimensional Photography, and Computer Modeling

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Facial reconstruction surgery is often a complex and staged process, leading to lengthy reconstructive journeys for patients. The integration of a clinical pathway can give patients a clearer understanding of what to expect at each stage of their reconstructive journey. OBJECTIVES: The authors demonstrate how the incorporation of multidisciplinary team clinics, three-dimensional (3D) photography, and 3D modeling into an integrated pathway can streamline the process for patients undergoing facial reconstructive surgeries and aid their understanding of their surgeries. METHODS: A novel clinical pathway was developed for patients undergoing facial reconstructive surgery at a tertiary reconstructive unit in London. A case series was collated of 35 patients who had been through the integrated pathway. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed using FACE-Q scales, Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale, Self-Perception of Age score, and Ordinal Rank change in facial aesthetic appearance, determined subjectively and objectively. Statistical analysis was performed to calculate mean averages for each scale and PROM. RESULTS: High patient satisfaction with overall facial appearance, aging appearance, and the decision-making process was demonstrated. The average perceived improvement in age-related facial appearance was -7.7 years postreconstruction compared with prereconstruction. The Ordinal Rank improvement on facial aesthetic appearance showed considerable improvement, both subjectively and objectively. CONCLUSIONS: The authors advocate the implementation of an integrated clinical pathway for facial reconstruction, with positive impacts observed in terms of patient satisfaction and objective assessments of facial appearance. Similar principles can be extrapolated to other aspects of reconstructive surgery

    Portable Three-Dimensional imaging to monitor small volume enhancement in face, vulva and hand: a comparative study

    Get PDF
    Multiple handheld 3-dimentional systems are available on the market but data regarding their use in detecting small volumes are limited. The aim of this study was to compare different portable 3D technologies in detecting small volumetric enhancement on a mannequin model and a series of patients. Five portable 3D systems (Artec Eva, Crisalix, Go!Scan, LifeViz Mini, and Vectra H1) were tested in a controlled environment with standardised volumes and in a clinical setting with patients undergoing small volume fat grafting to face, vulva and hand. Accuracy was assessed with absolute and relative technical error measurement (TEM and rTEM); precision with intra- and inter-observer reliability (rp and ICC), and usability in clinical practice with the following parameters: portability, suitability of use in operating theatre/clinic, ease of use of hardware and software, speed of capture, image quality, patient comfort, and cost. All tested devices presented overall good accuracy in detecting small volumetric changes ranging from 0.5 to 4 cc. Structured-light laser scanners (Artec Eva and Go!Scan) showed high accuracy but their use in clinical practice was limited by longer capture time, multiple wiring, and complex software for analysis. Crisalix was considered the most user-friendly, less bothering for patients, and truly portable but its use was limited to the face because the software does not include vulva and hand. 3D technologies exploiting the principle of passive stereophotogrammetry such as LifeViz Mini and Vectra H1 were the most versatile for assessing accurately multiple body areas, representing overall the best long-term value-for-money. 3D portable technology is a non-invasive, accurate, and reproducible method to assess the volumetric outcome after facial, vulval and hand injectables. The choice of the 3D system should be based on the clinical need and resources available
    corecore