[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.159.189.139. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 67
Citations 0
Invited Commentary
September 15, 2016

Using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Optimize Results—From Good to Great

Author Affiliations
  • 1Department of Otolaryngology—Head & Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
JAMA Facial Plast Surg. Published online September 15, 2016. doi:10.1001/jamafacial.2016.1099

As surgeons we strive for improvement with every procedure, always aiming for better outcomes on the next procedure than the one that immediately preceded it. We typically use multiple methods of performance improvement, including utilizing preoperative planning with photographs, morphing, and sketches, as well as detailed surgical documentation. We evaluate our technical modifications by examining our surgical results, frequently drawing on standardized surgical outcome instruments. Fortunately for us, we have an increasing number of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in our toolbox, a previously underused tool in our approach to performance improvement.1 By inviting the direct feedback from patients through validated PROMs we gain critical information from the population whose opinion matters the most. In this issue of JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery, Klassen et al2 share valuable information on the development and psychometric testing of the FACE-Q Cosmetic Eye Module.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×