A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The Turkish Version of the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation Questionnaire: Validation and Clinical Application. | LitMetric

The Turkish Version of the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation Questionnaire: Validation and Clinical Application.

Balkan Med J

Clinic of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Fatih Medical Park Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey

Published: February 2019

Background: An assessment of rhinoplasty from the patient’s perspective, in terms of satisfaction and quality of life, is quite important because these are the predominant factors indicating the success of rhinoplasty.

Aims: To translate the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation into Turkish and then validate the new version for use in Turkish patients.

Study Design: Validation study.

Methods: We enrolled 30 participants who were able to read and write Turkish and underwent primary rhinoplasty. The control group consisted of 58 healthy volunteers with no need for aesthetic or functional nasal surgery. The reliability of the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation-T was analyzed according to its internal consistency and test-retest reproducibility. Discriminant validity was calculated by comparing the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation-T scores between the patient and control groups. Responsiveness and sensitivity to changes in rhinoplasty outcomes were analyzed by comparing the patients’ pre- and postoperative Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation-T scores.

Results: The scores for questions 1-6 of the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation-T, as well as the total scores, were significantly lower in the patient group than in the control group (all p<0.05). In the patient group, the scores for questions 1-6 of the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation-T, as well as the total scores, were higher postoperatively than preoperatively (all p<0.05). The scores for each Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation-T question, as well as the total scores, did not differ significantly with respect to test-retest reproducibility (all p>0.05). The internal consistency of the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation-T was high, as evidenced by Cronbach’s α values of 0.887 preoperatively and 0.798 postoperatively.

Conclusion: The Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation-T constitutes a validated instrument with which to measure rhinoplasty outcomes among Turkish patients.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6409958PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.4274/balkanmedj.galenos.2018.2018.1129DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

rhinoplasty outcomes
28
outcomes evaluation-t
16
rhinoplasty
9
outcomes evaluation
8
control group
8
outcomes
7
turkish
4
turkish version
4
version rhinoplasty
4
evaluation questionnaire
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!