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.

The International Consortium for Health Outcome Measurement (ICHOM) has recently agreed upon a core outcome set for the comprehensive appraisal of cleft care, which puts a greater emphasis on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and, in particular, the CLEFT-Q. The CLEFT-Q comprises 12 scales with a total of 110 items, aimed to be answered by children as young as 8 years old. In this study, we aimed to use computerised adaptive testing (CAT) to reduce the number of items needed to predict results for each CLEFT-Q scale. We used an open-source CAT simulation package to run item responses over each of the full-length scales and its CAT counterpart at varying degrees of precision, estimated by standard error (SE). The mean number of items needed to achieve a given SE was recorded for each scale's CAT, and the correlations between results from the full-length scales and those predicted by the CAT versions were calculated. Using CATs for each of the 12 CLEFT-Q scales, we reduced the number of questions that participants needed to answer, that is, from 110 to a mean of 43.1 (range 34-60, SE < 0.55) while maintaining a 97% correlation between scores obtained with CAT and full-length scales. CAT is likely to play a fundamental role in the uptake of PROMs into clinical practice given the high degree of accuracy achievable with substantially fewer items.

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.

Background: Facial skin cancer and its surgical treatment can affect health-related quality of life. The FACE-Q Skin Cancer Module is a patient-reported outcome measure that measures different aspects of health-related quality of life and has recently been translated into Dutch. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of the translated version in a Dutch cohort using modern psychometric measurement theory (Rasch). Methods: Dutch participants with facial skin cancer were prospectively recruited and asked to complete the translated FACE-Q Skin Cancer Module. The following assumptions of the Rasch model were tested: unidimensionality, local independence, and monotonicity. Response thresholds, fit statistics, internal consistency, floor and ceiling effects, and targeting were assessed for all scales and items within the scales. Responsiveness was tested for the “cancer worry” scale. Results: In total, 259 patients completed the preoperative questionnaire and were included in the analysis. All five scales assessed showed a good or sufficient fit to the Rasch model. Unidimensionality and monotonicity were present for all scales. Some items showed a local dependency. Most of the scales demonstrate ordered item thresholds and appropriate fit statistics. Conclusions: The FACE-Q Skin Cancer Module is a well-designed patient-reported outcome measure that shows psychometric validity for the translated version in a Dutch cohort, using classical and modern test theory.