Conflicting Cultural and Religious Views on Cosmesis: The Modern Women's Dilemma.

Background: Women from countries with conflicting views on cosmesis may avoid these procedures for the fear of being rejected by the community. Understanding the motives that drive patients from these countries to seek cosmetic procedures helps discern possible causes of postoperative dissatisfaction, which can be prevented by careful selection of patients and individualizing their management protocols.

Objectives: This study helps identify the factors that affect Egyptian Muslim women's attitude toward cosmetic procedures. The main factors tested were female gender role stress (FGRS), body dysmorphic disorder (BDD), and religious attitude. The secondary factors investigated were health evaluation, life satisfaction, self-satisfaction, social media use, TV exposure, spouse/friends/family influence, and internalization of beauty standards.

Methods: Women willing to undergo cosmetic procedures were compared with those who were not. A survey exploring demographics and the different motives were posted for the public online.

Results: Among 502 participants, 288 were willing to undergo cosmetic procedures and 214 were not. Our findings showed a statistically significant difference for the degree of BDD, FGRS, and religiousness between willing and unwilling groups. Moreover, greater pressure from partner to change appearance, influence of friends and family on opinion regarding beauty of oneself, internalization of beauty standards, and lower ratings of life and self-satisfaction showed statistically significant association with willingness to undergo cosmetic treatment.

Conclusion: BDD, FGRS, and religious attitude are among the highest predictors of the willingness of women to undergo cosmetic procedures together with many other factors. This study is the first of its kind to evaluate several unexplored motives and opens the door for future research.

Level Of Evidence V: 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 .