Assessment of Patient Satisfaction With Appearance, Psychological Well-being, and Aging Appraisal After Upper Blepharoplasty: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Abstract

Abstract Background To determine the success of an upper blepharoplasty, a popular cosmetic procedure, it is essential to measure outcomes from the patient perspective because these often outweigh objective outcomes. Objectives This study aimed to assess patient-reported satisfaction with facial appearance, psychological well-being, and aging appraisal after upper blepharoplasty with validated questionnaires. Methods This prospective cohort study included upper blepharoplasty patients from 8 outpatient clinics. Patient-reported satisfaction was assessed with the FACE-Q at intake, and 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Results In total, 2134 patients were included. High satisfaction with outcome and decision to undergo treatment were measured 6 months postoperatively. Large improvements in FACE-Q scores (range, 0-100) between intake and 6 months postoperatively were seen for satisfaction with appearance (mean, effect size: eyes +48, 2.6; upper eyelids +48, 3.1; facial appearance overall +26, 1.4), psychological well-being (+11, 0.56), and aging appraisal (+22, 1.0). Patients reported they appeared a mean [standard deviation] 3.3 [5.2] years younger postblepharoplasty. No clinically relevant changes were seen between 6 and 12 months. Additionally, improvements in appearance were not dependent on their intake scores, whereas improvements in psychological well-being and aging appraisal were smaller in patients with higher intake scores. Satisfaction with treatment outcome was strongly correlated with appearance satisfaction but not with aging appraisal. Conclusions Significant improvements in patient satisfaction regarding appearance, psychological well-being, and aging appraisal can be seen 6 months after blepharoplasty, and outcomes remain stable up to 12 months postoperatively. These data may be used to inform patients and clinicians and improve the overall quality of care. Level of Evidence: 4