RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Facelifts are one of the most common facial aesthetic surgery procedures. Patient satisfaction determines success of most aesthetic surgery but has been historically difficult to assess. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated reviews by facelift patients on the aesthetic surgery social media website RealSelf.com to determine positive and negative factors underlying patient satisfaction following facelifts. METHODS: Facelift reviews were gathered from RealSelf.com with an automated web crawler. Reviews were categorized as positive or negative and by the primary and secondary reasons for the positive or negative review. Patient "worth it" and star ratings, physician specialty, and cost of procedure were also collected. RESULTS: A total of 2153 facelift reviews were collected. Overall, 1986 (92.24%) were positive and 167 (7.76%) were negative. The most common overall reasons for a positive review were aesthetic results (n=1571, 79.10%) and bedside manner (n=1488, 74.92%). The most common overall reasons for a negative review were outcome (n=137, 82.04%) and bedside manner (n=82, 49.10%). Most facelifts were performed by plastic surgeons (n=1796, 83.42%). The greatest 5-star rating percentages were seen for oral and maxillofacial surgeons (n=29, 93.55%), otolaryngologists (n=96, 92.31%), and plastic surgeons (n=1642, 91.43%). Of patients who provided a "worth it" rating, 1216 (91.91%) stated that their facelift was "worth it." CONCLUSION: Overall patient sentiment toward facelifts was positive. The factors most commonly affecting a positive patient experience were bedside manner and aesthetic results. Negative patient reviews were primarily attributed to dissatisfaction with aesthetic outcomes. Social media serves as a valuable tool for evaluating patient satisfaction with aesthetic surgery. 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 .
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to assess trends in consumer-product-related geriatric ocular injuries using National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) data. Understanding the specific consumer products and settings coded in the NEISS dictionary that contribute to geriatric (≥ 65 years) ocular injuries, along with changing patterns during events like the COVID-19 pandemic, provides crucial insights for tailoring therapy and preventative strategies. This ultimately may reduce the burden of eye injuries on both older adults and healthcare systems. METHODS: This was a retrospective population-based cohort study. The NEISS database was used to study eye injuries in geriatric adults from 2010 to 2021. Patients were categorized by age groups (65-74, 75-84, 85-94, ≥ 95 years), and data on demographics, injury types, product categories, and COVID-19 impact were collected. Pearson's chi-squared test (with p < 0.001 taken to indicate significance) was used to assess differences in expected ratios between age groups. RESULTS: A total of 168,685 eye injury cases in adults aged 65 years and older were analyzed. Household items, tools, and gardening products accounted for over 75% of injuries. Most injuries occurred at home (65.3%). Contusions/abrasions (40.3%) and a foreign body (19.3%) were common diagnoses. Females had more household-item-related injuries, while males had more foreign body injuries. Regarding therapeutic disposition, 93.7% of all injuries were treated/examined and released, which showed a decreasing trend as age increased, while hospital admission/transfer rates increased with age. Compared to before COVID-19, the percentage of injuries during COVID-19 due to tools decreased (from 22.5% to 18.3%), while injuries due to gardening/lawn/landscaping/patio products increased (from 13.8% to 15.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study characterizes geriatric ocular injuries and COVID-19 impact, highlighting common products and locations. Different age groups showed different injury patterns. Understanding these trends can aid injury prevention strategies for consumers and healthcare providers. Demographics and injury frequencies differed based on age and sex. Future research should further explore post-COVID-19 trends.