Plastic surgery training: evaluating patient satisfaction with facial fillers in a resident clinic.

Background: Resident cosmetic surgery clinics, or "chief clinics," are arguably the most effective way to provide cosmetic surgery training. Approximately 70 % of plastic surgery training programs utilize a "chief resident clinic" to augment their cosmetic surgery experience, even though a quantitative outcome scale is lacking to guide education. We report the use of the FACE-Q, a novel patient outcome tool, to evaluate patients' satisfaction with nonsurgical facial rejuvenation performed by residents.
Methods: The FACE-Q "Satisfaction with Facial Appearance Overall Scale" was administered to patients prior to and 1 week after undergoing nonsurgical facial rejuvenation performed by plastic surgery residents. All patients received nonsurgical facial rejuvenation with botulinum toxin A and hyaluronic acid as part of resident facial aesthetics training.
Results: Eleven patients completed the pre- and postinjection FACE-Q survey. Average overall facial appearance satisfaction scores of 47.6 pre- and 51.1 postinjection were found (p < 0.037), with a total possible score of 68. Ten patients (91 %) reported feeling satisfied or very satisfied with the overall appearance of their face following injection.
Conclusion: Despite resident inexperience and patient awareness that novices were performing the procedures, our experience supports use of the FACE-Q to optimize and endorse resident cosmetic surgery clinics. The learning curve for facial cosmetic procedures can be adversely affected by limited time available or exposure to improvement variables when initially performing the procedure. It is imperative to any technique that direct, and preferably quantitative, feedback is given so that an immediate modification can be generated and successive patient outcomes improved.
Level of Evidence Iv: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .