
Analysis of results after middle and lower face rejuvenation using autonomous web application for recording and dynamic evaluation of patient-oriented indicators
Журнал: Пластическая хирургия и эстетическая медицина. 2026;(2-2):75-82.
DOI: 10.17116/plast.hirurgia202602275
Read: 1478 раз
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To develop a standalone browser-based application for standardized collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in facial plastic surgery across three time points—preoperative baseline (PRE), early postoperative outcome (POST), and late outcome (POST1)—with automated scoring and export for statistical analysis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A client-side application (HTML/CSS/JavaScript) running locally in a web browser was created. The tool supports item entry on a 1–4 scale (blocks A–C), captures patient ID, treatment group/technique, and surgery date, performs data validation, computes total scores mapped to a 0–100 scale, and calculates a normalized improvement coefficient relative to PRE separately for POST and POST1 using
, where X is POST or POST1 (0–100 scale). Three methods for correction of age-related face changes were analyzed: high lifting of superficial muscular-aponeurotic system (SMAS), mobilization of SMAS in deep layer, and modified high SMAS lifting using zigzag cutting.
RESULTS
The tool implements the full cycle of PROM registration (input → validation → calculations → saving → upload), provides separate assessment of early and late results, as well as generates summary tables by intervention group for subsequent intergroup analysis. There were significant PROM improvements in all groups after mid- and lower-face rejuvenation surgeries compared to preoperative data. In early postoperative stage, mean normalized improvement coefficient was 0.669 for high SMAS lifting, 0.705 for deep-layer lifting, and 0.745 for zigzag SMAS lifting. In late stage, this indicator increased to 0.904, 0.946, and 0.962, respectively. Between-group differences in some composite indicators were significant (p<0.001), and within-group dynamics between time points PRE-POST, PRE-POST1 and POST-POST1 were significant in all groups (Wilcoxon test, p<0.001). These data confirm effectiveness of rejuvenation methods and informative value of standardized patient-centered outcome assessment tools.
CONCLUSION
The application improves reproducibility of patient-centered outcome assessments, reduces labor intensity of manual processing and simplifies data preparation for comparative studies of surgical techniques.
Keywords
- PROM
- FACE-Q
- facial plastic surgery
- patient satisfaction
- quality of life
- 0—100 scoring
- normalized improvement coefficient
- web application
Дата поступления: 03.03.2026
Дата принятия в печать: 28.03.2026
Дата публикации: 21.05.2026
- Q-Portfolio. FACE-Q®. Aesthetics. Accessed March 18, 2026. https://qportfolio.org/face-q/aesthetics/
- Gallo L, Kim P, Yuan M, Gallo M, Thoma A, Voineskos SH, Cano SJ, Pusic AL, Klassen AF. Best Practices for FACE-Q Aesthetics Research: A Systematic Review of Study Methodology. Aesthetic Surgery Journal. 2023; 43(Iss. 9):NP674-NP686. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjad141
- Ottenhof MJ, Veldhuizen IJ, Hensbergen LJv, Blankensteijn LL, Hoogbergen MM, Hulst RRWJ, Sidey-Gibbons CJ, Bramer W, vd Lei B. The Use of the FACE-Q Aesthetic: A Narrative Review. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. 2022; 46:2769-2780. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-02974-9
- Kim PJ, Hircock C, Huynh MNQ, Gallo L, Thoma A. The appropriateness and quality of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) selection in plastic surgery randomized controlled trials: A systematic review. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery. 2023;85:72-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2023.06.063
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). MDDT Summary of Evidence and Basis of Qualification Decision for FACE-Q. Aesthetics©. 2022. Accessed March 18, 2026. https://www.fda.gov/media/157956/download
- Q-Portfolio. FACE-Q®. Accessed March 18, 2026. https://qportfolio.org/face-q
- Q-Portfolio. FACE-Q®/Aesthetics: A User’s Guide. Accessed March 18, 2026. https://qportfolio.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/FACE-Q-AESTHETICS-USERS-GUIDE.pdf
- Gallo L, Churchill I, Kim P, Rae C, Voineskos SH, Thoma A, Pusic AL, Cano SJ, Klassen AF. Patient Factors That Impact FACE-Q Aesthetics Outcomes: An Exploratory Cross-sectional Regression Analysis. Aesthetic Surgery Journal. 2025;45(6):543-551. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjaf027
- Gallo L, Churchill IF, Kim P, Gallo M, Yuan M, Voineskos SH, Thoma A, Pusic AL, Cano SJ, Klassen AF. Measuring the Impact of Surgical and Non-surgical Facial Cosmetic Interventions Using FACE-Q Aesthetic Module Scales: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Plastic Surgery. 2025; 33(3):403-418. https://doi.org/10.1177/22925503231225480
- Verbo EV, Andryushchenko OA, Kraitor AS, Manturova NE, Galiy MI. Modified SMAS Lifting with a Zigzag SMAS Incision. Plastic Surgery and Aesthetic Medicine. 2025;2:18-24. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/plast.hirurgia202502118
Recommended articles:
Assessment of quality of life as a criterion for the effectiveness of treatment of patients with rosacea (according to two clinical cases).Journal of Adaptive Medical Immunology and Public Health Issues. 2026;2(2-3):72-78
Clinical and laboratory features and quality of life of children with severe bronchial asthma.Journal of Adaptive Medical Immunology and Public Health Issues. 2026;2(2-3):41-48
Complex non-drug therapies in patients with vasovagal syncope, adherence to treatment and quality of life.Russian Cardiology Bulletin. 2026;21(3):74-82
Experience in using a TAP block during TAPP surgery for inguinal hernia in a short-stay hospital setting.Endoscopic Surgery. 2026;32(5):48-54
Evaluation of spike formation and quality of life in patients with primary midline ventral hernias after endoscopic eTEP Sublay and IPOM surgeries: a cohort study.Endoscopic Surgery. 2026;32(5):20-29
Chronic bronchitis in outpatient practice: unsolved diagnostic problems and therapeutic challenges.Russian Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2026;29(9):110-115
How is artificial intelligence changing the daily work of therapists? A review of global and Russian experience.Medical Technologies. Assessment and Choice. 2026;48(3):46-52
Rationale for the sequence of procedures in a combined aesthetic correction protocol for facial involutional changes: botulinum toxin therapy and fractional photothermolysis.Plastic Surgery and Aesthetic Medicine. 2026;(3):86-96
Fat-sparing lower blepharoplasty for improvement of periorbital aesthetics.Plastic Surgery and Aesthetic Medicine. 2026;(3):50-61
Multifactorial assessment of septoplasty outcomes: from anatomical correction to improved quality of life.Russian Rhinology. 2026;34(3):62-68
