Introduction: In the past decade there has been an increasing interest in the field of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) which are now commonly used alongside traditional outcome measures, such as morbidity and mortality. Since the FACE-Q Aesthetic development in 2010, it has been widely used in clinical practice and research, measuring the quality of life and patient satisfaction. It quantifies the impact and change across different aspects of cosmetic facial surgery and minimally invasive treatments. We review how researchers have utilized the FACE-Q Aesthetic module to date, and aim to understand better whether and how it has enhanced our understanding and practice of aesthetic facial procedures. Methods: We performed a systematic search of the literature. Publications that used the FACE-Q Aesthetic module to evaluate patient outcomes were included. Publications about the development of PROMs or modifications of the FACE-Q Aesthetic, translation or validation studies of the FACE-Q Aesthetic scales, papers not published in English, reviews, comments/discussions, or letters to the editor were excluded. Results: Our search produced 1189 different articles; 70 remained after applying in- and exclusion criteria. Significant findings and associations were further explored. The need for evidence-based patient-reported outcome caused a growing uptake of the FACE-Q Aesthetic in cosmetic surgery and dermatology an increasing amount of evidence concerning facelift surgery, botulinum toxin, rhinoplasty, soft tissue fillers, scar treatments, and experimental areas. Discussion: The FACE-Q Aesthetic has been used to contribute substantial evidence about the outcome from the patient perspective in cosmetic facial surgery and minimally invasive treatments. The FACE-Q Aesthetic holds great potential to improve quality of care and may fundamentally change the way we measure success in plastic surgery and dermatology. Level of Evidence III: 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.

Background: Reconstruction of nasal skin defects can be challenging due to limited skin laxity and underlying cartilage and, therefore, often require a complex repair. The aim of this review is to systematically analyze the literature on nasal skin reconstructions with specific detail to flap reconstructions. Methods: A systematic literature review of nasal skin reconstruction was performed and focused on flap reconstructions. Flap reconstructions were stratified based on defect size, nasal subunit, and reconstruction type. Complication rates (CRs) and patient outcomes were also assessed. Results: A total of 176 articles (11,370 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 59 articles showed various flap techniques. For defects ≤1.5 cm, every subunit had four to six options except the alar rim, which showed one option. Rotation-advancement flaps were mostly used for the nasal tip and sidewall, whereas bilobed flaps were used more for the ala and dorsum. Defects >1.5 cm were most commonly reconstructed with the forehead flap. The mean CR of flap reconstructions was 13.8%. Only 8 of the 176 articles (4.5%) reported patient satisfaction using a standardized questionnaire. Conclusion: This review shows various flap reconstruction options with their corresponding CR that will help guide the surgeon in choosing reconstructive options for different nasal skin defects.

This scoping review aims to assess the various patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) specifically developed and validated for patients with hand and wrist conditions. The objective is to provide healthcare professionals with an up-to-date overview of the available PROMs, empowering them to make informed decisions in selecting the most appropriate PROM to support personalized care for their patients. The review adhered to the PRISMA-ScR 2018 checklist and involved a systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL Registry of Trials. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were established, and 2 independent reviewers screened and selected relevant articles. Data were extracted from full-text articles to identify the conditions of the hand or wrist and the PROMs used for measurement. A total of 22 PROMs for hand and wrist conditions were identified, with the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) being the most frequently employed, followed by the Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation and QuickDASH. The utilization of these PROMs was prominent in articles focusing on traumatic hand and wrist conditions, nerve conditions, and joint/arthrosis problems. Additionally, 67 articles (19.7%) employed more than one hand/wrist-specific PROM, and 8 generic PROMs were used in conjunction with hand/wrist-specific PROMs. This review offers a comprehensive overview of the available PROMs to assist healthcare professionals in selecting the most suitable measure for personalized care. The growing use and development of PROMs in this field highlights their increasing relevance in enhancing patient outcomes. Scoping Review.

Background: Excessive sun exposure is a major modifiable risk factor for skin cancer, with ultraviolet (UV) radiation identified as a key contributor. Saudi Arabia’s high UV index and hot climate increase the risk of photo-induced skin damage among residents. Although awareness of sun protection is growing, inconsistent use of preventive measures persists, often due to misconceptions and limited knowledge. This study aimed to assess patterns of current and prior sun exposure across demographic groups in Saudi Arabia using the validated Arabic version of the Sun Exposure and Behaviour Inventory (Ar-SEBI). Methods: An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted between August 2024 and January 2025 across all five Saudi regions using non-probability quota sampling to ensure geographic representation. Sun-exposure practices and protective behaviours were measured using the Ar-SEBI. Data were collected via an online questionnaire and analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics 26. Normality was assessed via Shapiro–Wilk and Levene’s tests. Depending on the distribution, data were analysed using the Mann–Whitney U test, the Kruskal–Wallis H test, unpaired t-tests, or ANOVA. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 11,491 adults participated. Significant demographic and regional differences in sun-related behaviours were observed. Overall, 72.7% of participants were unaware of the SPF level of their sunscreen. Males and individuals under 30 years of age had significantly higher sun exposure scores than females and older adults, respectively (p < 0.001). Residents of the Southern region had the highest exposure and behaviour scores (p < 0.001), despite also reporting higher engagement in some protective measures. Additionally, sun exposure scores increased progressively with darker Fitzpatrick skin types (IV–VI) (p < 0.001), suggesting a common belief that darker skin confers adequate protection. Conclusions: This study reveals notable disparities in sun-protection practices across Saudi Arabia. Younger adults, males, and individuals with darker skin types reported greater sun exposure and indicators of lower protective awareness. These findings support the need for targeted, culturally tailored public health campaigns and policy measures to enhance sun safety and reduce long-term dermatological risks.