Patient attitudes toward resident participation in cosmetic vs reconstructive outpatient consultations.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of residency programs is to provide trainees with exposure to all aspects of their chosen field so that they exit the program ready to be independent practitioners. However, it is common in some plastic surgery residency training programs to exclude residents from participation in consultations with patients who are seeking cosmetic surgery. The purpose of this study was to determine whether cosmetic surgery patients had a different view about resident involvement than reconstructive surgery patients and to evaluate what factors might be linked to patient attitudes on this topic. PARTICIPANTS: All new patients older than 18 years presenting to either academic or nonacademic locations were asked to complete the voluntary survey at their initial consultation. SETTING: The study was conducted at both the Ohio State University (academic) and Advanced Aesthetic and Laser Surgery (private practice) in Columbus, Ohio. DESIGN: The survey asked patients to identify their surgical concern as either cosmetic or reconstructive and to indicate the location on their body where they were having surgery. Additionally, a series of statements regarding resident involvement was presented with a 5-point Likert-type rating system to assess each patient's attitudes about a range of factors, such as resident sex and seniority. RESULTS: In total, 119 patients participated in the study by completing the survey. Of this population, 59.7% (n = 71) were classified as reconstructive surgery patients and 40.3% (n = 48) were classified as cosmetic surgery patients. Based on responses, it was determined that reconstructive surgery patients were more approving of resident involvement in their care than cosmetic surgery patients were. When other factors were analyzed, the patients seeking breast surgery were found to be more apprehensive about resident participation than non-breast surgery patients were. CONCLUSION: Although there were some differences in the way resident participation was perceived by cosmetic and reconstructive surgery patient populations, neither group strongly believed that resident participation decreased the quality of patient care. Based on these findings, plastic surgery training programs should begin to allow residents to become more involved in the care of cosmetic surgery patients.

Improvement in stress urinary incontinence after abdominoplasty.

BACKGROUND: Abdominoplasty is indicated in cosmetic surgery to improve body contour. Results from several studies suggest that abdominoplasty also could be therapeutic for certain individuals with urinary incontinence. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to determine the potential therapeutic effect of abdominoplasty on urinary incontinence in a large population to confirm the findings of smaller studies and to identify common characteristics of patients who experience the greatest improvement in these symptoms postoperatively. METHODS: Through a retrospective chart review, the authors identified 250 patients who underwent cosmetic abdominoplasty. These patients were invited to participate in a survey to ascertain changes in stress urinary incontinence (SUI) symptoms after abdominoplasty. Patients were subgrouped according to postoperative changes in their urinary incontinence symptoms, and the subgroups were evaluated for common within-group characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 250 patients who underwent abdominoplasty during the period of interest, 100 (40%) completed the survey, half of whom (n=50) reported incontinence preoperatively. After abdominoplasty, 30 (60%) of these 50 patients noted improvement in their symptoms, and the other 20 (40%) reported no improvement. Lack of previous cesarean section was a predictor of improvement in SUI symptoms after abdominoplasty. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominoplasty to improve body contour also may alleviate symptoms of SUI, especially among patients who have not undergone previous cesarean section. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

A reliable method for the preoperative estimation of tissue to be removed during reduction mammaplasty.

BACKGROUND: Insurance requirements for prior authorization of reduction mammaplasty are becoming increasingly stringent, with the sole criterion determined by the surgeon being the estimation of the amount of tissue to be removed. Previous formulas for predicting resected tissue weights have been inconsistent and particularly unreliable in smaller reductions. This study describes a dependable, surgeon-specific method based on two simple preoperative measurements to estimate tissue resection weights in patients undergoing reduction mammaplasty. METHODS: The medical charts of 72 consecutive patients who underwent reduction mammaplasty were reviewed. Preoperatively obtained measurements from the first 15 patients in the authors' series were plotted against the actual corresponding amount of breast tissue removed at the time of surgery. Linear regression of this plot was used to generate a mathematical formula that was then used to predict resection weights of the subsequent 57 patients. The results were compared with the actual weights recorded intraoperatively. RESULTS: Several measurements were evaluated and Pearson coefficients generated. The mathematical product of two unique breast-only surface measurements along horizontal and vertical planes generated the linear regression formula with the greatest accuracy (r = 0.95) for predicting the weight of tissue to be resected compared with either measurement alone or sternal notch-to-nipple distance. CONCLUSION: By using two simple preoperative measurements correlated with tissue resection weights in a small series of procedures, any reconstructive surgeon can create his or her own reliable formula for predicting breast tissue resection weights for reduction mammaplasty.