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 .