Association Between Satisfaction with Nasal Appearance and Olfactory Function in Patients Undergoing Septorhinoplasty Surgery

Does being a healthcare professional affect satisfaction after septorhinoplasty?

This study aims to determine the differences in satisfaction levels after septorhinoplasty between patients who are healthcare workers and those who are not. The study includes patients who underwent primary septorhinoplasty surgery, divided into two groups: healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers. The Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire was administered to the patients at the 6th postoperative month. Among the 37 patients, 18 were healthcare workers, and 19 were non-healthcare workers. The mean Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation score for healthcare workers at the 6th postoperative month was 75.69 ± 16.06, while in the non-healthcare worker group, the ROE scores were 60.31 ± 27.69. The findings from our study indicated that individuals in the healthcare profession exhibited significantly greater satisfaction rates following septorhinoplasty in comparison to those in the non-healthcare worker group, with a statistically significant difference noted (p: 0.046). Having more knowledge about septorhinoplasty surgery and its complications among healthcare workers may allow for more realistic expectations regarding the surgical intervention. Simultaneously, it may facilitate better communication with the surgeon and the expression of expectations. Clinicians should pay attention not only to the patient's intellectual level but also to their health literacy in communication with the patient.

Septorhinoplasty and the Late Impact on Olfactory Function: A Review and Meta-analysis

Septorhinoplasty (SRP) is one of the most commonly performed procedures worldwide. There is a recognized debate about the impact of nasal surgery on olfactory function (OF). The study's objective was to assess the effect of SRP on late postoperative OF. A comprehensive review and meta-analysis were employed to assess OF after SRP. All the integrated studies used objective instruments to quantify OF before and after surgery. A literature search was conducted, and the selected works were evaluated, computed, and finally included in a meta-analysis. The risk of bias was assessed using the NIH Guidance for Evaluating the Quality of Before-After (Pre-Post) Studies with No Control Group. Only the latest follow-up OF measurements provided by each research were considered in the analysis. The 95% confidence interval of the effect magnitude for each study was calculated to elucidate effect sizes. Eleven studies were included in the analysis. Five studies reported late OF improvement (45.5%), five reported no alteration in OF (45.5%), and only one study reported OF impairment after SRP (9%). Some works described a transitory decline in OF shortly following surgery, followed by postoperative improvement. A pooled meta-analysis showed that OF was not significantly altered after SRP (p = 0.10) in the late follow-up. SRP surgery seems to constitute a safe procedure concerning OF in the long term. According to research, OF may deteriorate temporarily after surgery with later improvement, sometimes to higher values than baseline. The anticipated evolution of OF after intervention could be discussed during the preoperative consultation for SRP.