Objective: The use of standing electronic scooters associated with micromobility applications (e‐scooters) has risen nationally. The aim of this study was to obtain a detailed view of soft tissue and bony craniofacial injury associated with e‐scooter‐related trauma.Methods: Single‐institution retrospective case series of patients presenting to a level 1 trauma center emergency department or trauma unit with documented e‐scooter‐related craniofacial injury.Results: Of 203 included patients, 188 (92.6%) patients sustained craniofacial injury. One hundred thirty‐one (64.5%) had exclusively soft tissue injury, 3 (1.5%) exclusively bony injury, 51 (25.1%) both soft and bony injuries, and twenty‐five (12.3%) patients sustained dental injury. Aesthetic units most frequently sustaining acute soft tissue injury were the forehead (n = 106, 34.6%), scalp (n = 36, 11.8%), chin (n = 34, 11.1%), upper lip (n = 32, 10.5%), and cheek (n = 31, 10.1%). Aesthetic subunits most often sustaining acute soft tissue injury included the brow (42, 13.7%), central forehead (39, 12.7%), lateral forehead (n = 25, 8.2%), and upper lip vermillion (n = 23, 7.5%). Craniofacial osseous fracture most often occurred in the orbit (n = 42, 24.6%) and maxilla (n = 40, 23.4%). Individual osseous segments most frequently sustaining acute fracture included the anterior maxillary sinus wall (n = 22, 12.9%), nasal bone (n = 20, 11.7%), lateral orbital wall (n = 16, 9.4%), orbital floor (n = 15, 8.8%), and zygomatic bone (13, 7.6%).Conclusions: Our analysis demonstrates that most patients presenting to our center with craniofacial trauma sustained acute bony fracture, most often to the midface. Our data of common injuries associated with e‐scooter trauma could inform implementation in the form of facial safety equipment or safety skills training for e‐scooter riders.Level of evidence: 4

This review summarizes common risk factors for poor surgical healing on the face and neck and a generalized approach to treating a delayed healing wound. During the preoperative evaluation patients should be screened for prior irradiation, cigarette or e-cigarette use, chronic steroid use, alcoholism, diabetes, malnutrition, and other chronic medical conditions and medications. Despite the surgeon's best efforts to prevent poor surgical healing, some wounds may display signs of persistent inflammation. The facial plastic surgeon should be astute in recognizing delayed healing and identifying intrinsic and extrinsic risk factors so that timely intervention can be performed.

Importance: The COVID‐19 pandemic is changing how health care providers practice. As some telemedicine and telecommunication support tools have been incorporated into the otolaryngology practice in response to safety and access demands, it is essential to review how these tools and services can help facilitate facial trauma evaluation during a time when clinical resources are limited.Objective: To review applications of telemedicine for the evaluation of facial trauma to better direct utilization of these methods and technologies during times of limited access to clinical resources such as the COVID‐19 pandemic.Methods: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science.Results: After screening 158 titles and abstracts, we identified 16 eligible studies involving facial trauma evaluation using telemedicine. Telemedicine opportunities for facial trauma evaluation have the potential to be developed in the areas of multidisciplinary remote consultations, facial trauma triage, patient engagement, and postoperative follow‐up.Conclusion: The COVID‐19 pandemic is posing obstacles for both providers and patients in the delivery of health care at a time of limited clinical resources. Telemedicine may provide a potential useful tool in the evaluation and triage of facial injuries and patient engagement.

Importance: The difficulty associated with concealing keloids located in the face and neck regions often results in disfigurement and psychological stress for patients. Objective: The purpose of this review is to determine if specific regions on the head and neck have a greater propensity to develop keloids to alert the facial plastic surgeon of regional keloid risk. Evidence Review: PubMed, Ovid, Cochrane, and Embase computerized searches were performed through January 2020. Two independent reviewers conducted data extraction following a predetermined protocol identifying 1445 keloid studies. Findings: The prevalence of keloids in different regions of the head and neck was evaluated among 1598 head and neck keloids in the final analysis. Three of nine studies evaluated keloids specific to the ear and described a combined 1194 ear keloids locations (53.0% lobule, 22.9% cartilaginous region, 0.3% both, and 23.7% unspecified). One study reported exclusively on 82 neck keloids 72% of which were located in the submental or submandibular region. The remaining five studies evaluated 322 head and neck keloids more generally and showed 70.2% ear, 9.6% unspecified, 6.5% peri-/postauricular, 5.6% beard area, 2.2% scalp/forehead, 2.2% chin, 1.6% lateral face, 1.6% neck, and 0.3% central face keloids. Conclusions and Relevance: The ear, periauricular regions, bearded facial regions, and submandibular and submental sites show the highest propensity for keloid development in the head and neck region. The lowest keloid risk occurred in the central face region. Risk factors in relation to facial and neck regions associated with the formation of keloids should be taken into consideration before performing elective procedures in keloid susceptible individuals.