Future of Outcomes Research in Plastic Surgery

Current trends in retraction of plastic surgery and reconstruction research

BACKGROUND

Various studies regarding retractions of publications have determined the rate of retraction has increased in recent years. Although this trend may apply to any field, there is a paucity of literature exploring the publication of erroneous studies within plastic and reconstructive surgery. The present study aims to identify trends in frequency and reasons for retraction of plastic and reconstructive surgery studies, with analysis of subspecialty and journals.

METHODS

A database search was conducted for retracted papers within plastic and reconstructive surgery. The initial search yielded 2347 results, which were analyzed by two independent reviewers. 77 studies were jointly identified for data collection.

RESULTS

The most common reasons for retractions were duplication (n = 20, 25.9 %), request of author (n = 15, 19.5 %), plagiarism (n = 9, 11.6 %), error (n = 9, 11.6 %), fraud (n = 2, 2.6 %), and conflict of interest (n = 1, 1.3 %). 15 were basic science studies (19.4 %), 58 were clinical science studies (75.3 %), and 4 were not categorized (5.2 %). Subspecialties of retracted papers were maxillofacial (n = 29, 37.7 %), reconstructive (n = 17, 22.0 %), wound healing (n = 8, 10.4 %), burn (n = 6, 7.8 %), esthetics (n = 5, 6.5 %), breast (n = 3, 3.9 %), and trauma (n = 1, 1.3 %). Mean impact factor was 2.9 and average time from publication to retraction was 32 months.

CONCLUSION

Analysis of retracted plastic surgery studies revealed a recent rise in frequency of retractions, spanning a wide spectrum of journals and subspecialties.

A Systematic Review of Qualitative Research in Hand Surgery

No formal review of qualitative research in hand surgery has been previously performed. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the reporting quality of hand surgery qualitative research with the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR), a 21-item checklist. The secondary objectives were to describe qualitative research in hand surgery by domain, determine differences in reporting quality based on use of a reporting guideline, publication of SRQR and journal of publication, and to identify important outcomes in hand surgery conditions. Fifty-five studies were included from MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Emcare. The median SRQR score was 16. The lowest reported sections were context, data collection methods, and data analysis. Qualitative research was found in multiple domains of hand surgery. There was a significant difference between papers that used a reporting guideline and studies published after the publication of the SRQR. Clinical/medical/basic science journals had the highest median SRQR score. Outcomes identified were pain for carpal tunnel syndrome and pain, function, unintentional harm, recurrence, and recovery time for Dupuytren disease. To further improve reporting quality in hand surgery qualitative research, we recommend that investigators ensure they provide rationale for their methodology and become familiar with the SRQR guidelines.

Patient-reported outcomes: A primer for plastic surgeons

Surgical care today is no longer evaluated only on clinical outcomes but also on holistic patient wellbeing. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a representation of the patient's perspective on their results and wellbeing. The aim of this review is to establish PROs as the center of healthcare and plastic surgery, to delineate important PROs in plastic surgery practice and research, to discuss the future of PROs within our discipline, and to encourage surgeons to incorporate PROs into their practice. PROs are an important parallel of clinical outcomes in that they can use the patient's perspective to 1) support clinical findings, 2) detect differences in care when there are no clear clinical differences, 3) track progress longitudinally, and 4) support systemic improvements in healthcare. Plastic surgery as a field is naturally aligned with PROs because, as a discipline, we focus on patient form and function. The emerging forefronts of plastic surgery such as lymphedema care, gender-affirming care, peripheral nerve surgery, migraine surgery, and breast implant illness are critically dependent on PROs. In the next decade, we predict that there will be a continued proliferation of robust PRO measures and integration into healthcare delivery. Outcomes research in surgery should continue to evolve as surgeons provide increasingly more benefits to improve patient wellbeing. Plastic surgeons must continue to play a prominent role in the future of PROs.

Giving meaning to patient reported outcomes in breast reconstruction after mastectomy - A systematic review of available scores and suggestions for further research

Background

There are three patient reported outcome measure instruments (PROMs) that have adequate content validity for breast reconstruction, BREAST-Q, BRECON-31 and EORTC QLQ-BRECON-23, and they all have been robustly validated. The aim of this study was to systematically review scores giving meaning to validated PROMs for breast reconstruction after mastectomy and discuss methods to enable interpretation of them.

Methods

A systematic review was performed according to the recommendations of PRISMA. Prospero CRD42021255874. Included articles had to meet criteria defined in a SPIDER (Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, Research type). The included studies were critically appraised using the GRADE approach.

Results

Three articles were finally included in the review: two studies on scores for healthy controls and one on minimally important differences (MIDs), both of BREAST-Q. All of the studies were performed in North America. Only MIDs based on statistical characteristics, and not on what constitutes a relevant change for the patient, exist. The risk of bias was evaluated as very high and moderate, respectively, of inconsistencies as low, of indirectness as high, of imprecisions as low, and of publication bias as probably low.

Conclusions

The overall certainty of evidence for scores giving meaning to PROMs for breast reconstruction is low (GRADE ƟƟОО). More studies are needed to establish relevant healthy control scores and what constitutes a relevant clinical difference for patient-reported outcome measures for breast reconstruction after mastectomy. Clinical implications of the findings and suggestions for further research are suggested in the article.

•

Patient reported outcome measurements have to be clinically interpretable to make sense.

•

Three articles on scores giving meaning to PROMs for breast reconstruction post-mastectomy exist.

•

More studies are needed to establish relevant controls and clinical differences in scores.

•

Clinical implications and suggestions for further research are discussed.

Measuring Patient-Reported Outcomes: Key Metrics in Reconstructive Surgery

Satisfaction and improved quality of life are among the most important outcomes for patients undergoing plastic and reconstructive surgery for a variety of diseases and conditions. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential tools for evaluating the benefits of newly developed surgical techniques. Modern PROMs are being developed with new psychometric approaches, such as Rasch Measurement Theory, and their measurement properties (validity, reliability, responsiveness) are rigorously tested. These advances have resulted in the availability of PROMs that provide clinically meaningful data and effectively measure functional as well as psychosocial outcomes. This article guides the reader through the steps of creating a PROM and highlights the potential research and clinical uses of such instruments. Limitations of PROMs and anticipated future directions in this field are discussed.

Item reduction of the patient-rated wrist evaluation using decision tree modelling

Background: The aim of this study is to assess the viability of a decision tree version of an often used questionnaire to measure wrist pain and disability, the Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation.Methods: Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation scores were collected from a cohort of 10394 patients who are part of a routine outcome measurement system. A decision tree version of the Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) was created. The intraclass correlation was used to evaluate the inter-version reliability between the original PRWE and the decision tree version.Results: The decision tree reduced the number of questions from 5 to 3 for the pain subscale, and from 10 to 3 for the disability subscale. The intraclass correlation between the original PRWE and the decision tree version was 0.97. The mean difference between the Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation and the decision tree Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation total sumscore was 0.35 (95% CI -9.92-10.62).Conclusions: We found that the decision tree was successful at reducing the items of the Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation from fifteen to only six questions with very high similarity to the scores of the full questionnaire.Implications for rehabilitationThe Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation can reliably be used with 6 instead of 15 questions.Decision trees are useful statistical tools to shorten lengthy questionnaires, especially when large amounts of data are available.Having a shortened Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation saves patients and clinicians time in answering this specific questionnaire.

Motivations for seeking minimally invasive cosmetic procedures in an academic outpatient setting

BACKGROUND

The demand for minimally invasive cosmetic procedures has continued to rise, yet few studies have examined this patient population.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to define the demographics, social characteristics, and motivations of patients seeking minimally invasive facial cosmetic procedures.

METHODS

A prospective, single-institution cohort study of 72 patients was conducted from 2011 through 2014 at an urban academic medical center. Patients were aged 25 through 70 years; presented for botulinum toxin or soft tissue filler injections; and completed demographic, informational, and psychometric questionnaires before treatment. Descriptive statistics were conducted using Stata statistical software.

RESULTS

The average patient was 47.8 years old, was married, had children, was employed, possessed a college or advanced degree, and reported an above-average income. Most patients felt that the first signs of aging occurred around their eyes (74.6%), and a similar percentage expressed this area was the site most desired for rejuvenation. Almost one-third of patients experienced a "major life event" within the preceding year, nearly half had sought prior counseling from a mental health specialist, and 23.6% were being actively prescribed psychiatric medication at the time of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing injectable aesthetic treatments in an urban outpatient academic center were mostly employed, highly educated, affluent women who believed that their procedure would positively impact their appearance. A significant minority experienced a major life event within the past year, which an astute clinician should address during the initial patient consultation. This study helps to better understand the psychosocial factors characterizing this patient population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Therapeutic.