Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Oct;41(5):1177-1183.
doi: 10.1007/s00266-017-0892-1. Epub 2017 May 25.

Nonsurgical Facial Rejuvenation: Outcomes and Safety of Neuromodulator and Soft-Tissue Filler Procedures Performed in a Resident Cosmetic Clinic

Affiliations

Nonsurgical Facial Rejuvenation: Outcomes and Safety of Neuromodulator and Soft-Tissue Filler Procedures Performed in a Resident Cosmetic Clinic

Ali A Qureshi et al. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2017 Oct.

Abstract

Background: The ability to perform nonsurgical facial rejuvenation procedures is a core competency requirement for plastic surgery residents. However, limited data exist on training models to achieve competency in nonsurgical facial rejuvenation and on outcomes of these procedures performed by residents. The purpose here is to evaluate patient-reported outcomes and safety of nonsurgical facial rejuvenation procedures performed by plastic surgery residents.

Methods: We prospectively enrolled 50 patients undergoing neuromodulator and/or soft-tissue filler injections in a resident cosmetic clinic between April and August 2016. Patients completed FACE-Q modules pre-procedure, and at 1 week and 1 month post-procedure. Paired t-tests were used to calculate statistical significance of changes between pre- and post-procedure scores. Effect sizes were calculated to assess clinical improvement from pre- to post-procedure. The magnitude of change was interpreted using Cohen's arbitrary criteria (small 0.20, moderate 0.50, large 0.80).

Results: Forty-five patients completed the study. Patients experienced significant improvements (p < 0.001) in all FACE-Q domains, including aging appearance appraisal (improved from 49.7 ± 29.4 to 70.1 ± 21.6, effect size 0.79), psychological well-being (44.0 ± 14.6-78.6 ± 20.7, effect size 1.93), social functioning (48.6 ± 16.6-75.5 ± 21.7, effect size 1.20), and satisfaction with facial appearance (50.1 ± 13.7-66.2 ± 19.7, effect size 0.95). At 1 month, overall satisfaction with outcome and decision were 75.8 ± 20.7 and 81.1 ± 20.4, respectively. No patients experienced complications.

Conclusions: Nonsurgical facial rejuvenation procedures performed by residents can improve patients' quality of life and provide high satisfaction without compromising safety.

Level of evidence iv: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors http://www.springer.com/00266 .

Keywords: Facial rejuvenation; Neurotoxin; Plastic surgery education; Residency.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Frequency of neuromodulator injection by anatomic location
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Frequency of soft-tissue filler by anatomic location
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
A 43-year-old female patient injected in multiples sites, including 45U of Botox in the forehead and glabella, 0.8 cc Juvederm XC for malar augmentation, and 0.8 cc of Belotero for tear trough correction. Top photos are pre-procedure and bottom photos are 3 months post-procedure.

Comment in

References

    1. American Society of Plastic Surgeons (2016) ASPS Procedural Statistics. https://www.plasticsurgery.org/news/plastic-surgery-statistics. Accessed 03/01/2017
    1. American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (2016) Cosmetic Surgery National Data Bank Statistics. http://www.surgery.org/sites/default/files/ASAPS-Stats2016.pdf. Accessed 03/01/2017 - PubMed
    1. Silvestre J, Serletti JM, Chang B (2016) Disparities in Aesthetic Procedures Performed by Plastic Surgery Residents. Aesthetic surgery journal. doi:10.1093/asj/sjw215 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Qureshi AA, Tenenbaum MM (2016) Commentary on: Disparities in Aesthetic Procedures Performed by Plastic Surgery Residents. Aesthetic surgery journal. doi:10.1093/asj/sjw219 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hultman CS, Wu C, Bentz ML, Redett RJ, Shack RB, David LR, Taub PJ, Janis JE (2015) Identification of Best Practices for Resident Aesthetic Clinics in Plastic Surgery Training: The ACAPS National Survey. Plastic and reconstructive surgery Global open 3 (3):e370. doi:10.1097/01.gox.0000464864.49568.18 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms