Measuring surgical outcomes in congenital craniofacial surgery: An objective approach

Journal of Craniofacial Surgery

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 120-126

  Versnel, Sarah L ^a,b   Mulder, Paul G H ^a,b   Hovius, Steven E R ^a,b   Mathijssen, Irene M J ^a,b  

^a Erasmus Medical Centre ^*

^b ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Craniofacial malformations; Facial cleft; Outcome

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLEFT FACE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRANIOFACIAL MALFORMATION; CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY; HUMAN; INSTRUMENT; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCORING SYSTEM; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

CEPHALOMETRY; CRANIOFACIAL ABNORMALITIES; FACIES; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33846549067     PISSN: 10492275     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e31802cf424     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Okkerse JM, Beemer FA, Cordia-de Haan M, et al. Facial attractiveness and facial impairment ratings in children with craniofacial malformations. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2001; 38:386-392
2. Kiekens RM, Maltha JC, van't Hof MA, et al. A measuring system for facial aesthetics in Caucasian adolescents: reproducibility and validity. Eur J Orthod 2005;27:579-584
3. Al-Omari I, Millett DT, Ayoub A, et al. An appraisal of three methods of rating facial deformity in patients with repaired complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2003;40:530-537
4. Tobiasen JM, Hiebert JM, Boraz RA. Development of scales of severity of facial cleft impairment. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1991;28:419-424
5. Ritter K, Trotman CA, Phillips C. Validity of subjective evaluations for the assessment of lip scarring and impairment. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2002;39:587-596
6. Al-Omari I, Millett DT, Ayoub AF. Methods of assessment of cleft-related facial deformity: a review. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2005;42:145-156
7. Vegter F, Hage JJ. Facial anthropometry in cleft patients: a historical appraisal. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2001;38:577-581
8. Hood CA, Hosey MT, Bock M, et al. Facial characterization of infants with cleft lip and palate using a three-dimensional capture technique. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2004;41:27-35
9. Duskova M, Kristen M, Smahel Z. The anthropometric verification of corrective surgery outcome in cleft secondary deformities. J Craniofac Surg 2006;17:447-453
10. Yousif NJ, Gosain A, Sanger JR, et al. The nasolabial fold: a photogrammetric analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994;93:70-77
11. Pitanguy I, Pamplona D, Weber HI, et al. Numerical modeling of facial aging. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998;102:200-204
12. Mishima K, Sugahara T, Mori Y, et al. Application of a new method for anthropometric analysis of the nose. Plast Reconstr Surg 1996;98:637-644
13. Tapia A, Etxeberria E, Blanch A, et al. A review of 685 rhytidectomies: a new method of analysis based on digitally processed photographs with computer-processed data. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999;104:1800-1813
14. Strasser EJ. An objective grading system for the evaluation of cosmetic surgical results. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999;104: 2282-2285
15. Strasser EJ. Application of an objective grading system for the evaluation of cosmetic surgical results. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002;109:1733-1740
16. Badley EM. An introduction to the concepts and classifications of the international classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps. Disabil Rehabil 1993;15:161-178
17. Fattahi TT. An overview of facial aesthetic units. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003;61:1207-1211