Evidence-Based Performance Measures for Rhinoplasty: A Multidisciplinary Performance Measure Set
Manahan MA, Fedok F, Davidson C, Ahmad J, Constantinides M, Davis R, Friedman O, Gilman R, Ishii L, Keyes G, Lin SJ, Marcus B, Matarasso A, Most SP, Quereshy F, Sinno S, Steinbacher D, Tollefson T, Rohrich RJ.
What this paper says
A joint working group of three American surgical societies defined four quality measures for rhinoplasty care: one covering patient satisfaction and three covering the consultation, airway assessment and pain management.
Overview
The American Society of Plastic Surgeons, the American Academy of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, and the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery commissioned a multidisciplinary work group to draft quality measures for patients having rhinoplasty, both for breathing and for appearance. The group identified one outcome measure and three process measures.
Sections of note
- Consensus document produced by a multidisciplinary work group; no patient data, rates or follow up are reported.
- The outcome measure covers patient satisfaction with rhinoplasty procedures.
- The first process measure covers motivations and expectations for the procedure.
- The second process measure covers airway assessment.
- The third process measure covers nonnarcotic shared decision making strategies for pain management.
- The measures were approved by the plastic surgery society's quality work group and executive committee, and by the otolaryngology foundation, the facial plastic surgery academy, The Rhinoplasty Society and the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.
- The group recommends the measures for quality initiatives, continuing medical education, maintenance of certification, clinical data registry reporting and national quality reporting.
What it means for a patient
- These measures define what the societies consider adequate rhinoplasty care rather than what technique to use.
- Three of the four concern the consultation and the medication plan, not the surgery itself.
- Airway assessment is included even for cosmetic cases, meaning breathing should be checked before appearance surgery.
- Nothing here measures whether following the measures improves results; that has not been studied.
Why this paper matters
Rhinoplasty quality has been judged mainly by individual surgeon results, with no agreed standard across specialties. This document establishes one, endorsed by the main American societies. Whether the measures are adopted, and whether they change outcomes, remains to be seen.
Terms
- Performance measure: a defined standard used to assess whether care met an agreed benchmark.
- Outcome measure: a measure of the result of care, here patient satisfaction.
- Process measure: a measure of whether a step of care was carried out.
- Nonnarcotic: pain relief that does not use opioid medication.
- Shared decision making: the patient and clinician choosing a plan together.
Summary written by rhinoplasty.cc from the abstract, 2026-09-09; not medical advice. The authors' own abstract follows.
From the abstract
“The American Society of Plastic Surgeons, the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, and the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery commissioned the multidisciplinary Rhinoplasty Performance Measure Development Work Group to identify and draft quality measures for the care of…”
Excerpt; the full abstract is on PubMed.
Citation
Authors on this site
Start here
This paper sits outside the 16 topic groups; the archive holds every paper by journal and year.
Journal archive by topic
Every topic opens with what the literature says, cited line by line to PubMed.
Papers from 2021
Every paper in the archive published the same year.
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Papers in the archive from this journal, 2011 to 2026.
Related papers
Same journal, 2021.
- PRS Component Restoration in the Bilateral Intermediate Cleft Tip RhinoplastyDang BN, Pfaff MJ, Jain NS et al.2021PMID 34398093Summary
- PRS Cone-Beam Computed Tomography: A User-Friendly, Practical Roadmap to the Planning and Execution of Every Rhinoplasty-A 5-Year ReviewRobotti E, Daniel RK, Leone F2021PMID 33835107Summary
- PRS Differences between Primary and Revision Rhinoplasty: Indications, Techniques, Grafts, and OutcomesHacker S, Pollock J, Gubisch W et al.2021PMID 34270514Summary
- PRS 2021PMID 33890888
- PRS 2021PMID 34550929
- PRS Flexible Tongue-in-Groove Technique and Its Effectiveness Compared to Classic Tongue-in-Groove and Columellar Strut Graft Techniques: A Retrospective Analysis of 237 Open Rhinoplasty CasesErdal AI, Genç İG, Pasinlioğlu B et al.2021PMID 34644278Summary
- PRS How Should the Cellphone Be Used to Obtain Good Pictures for Rhinoplasty?Jaber A, Saghir M, Fernandez-Pellon R et al.2021PMID 34233343
- PRS Laser-Assisted Rhinoplasty: The Future Generation Rhinoplasty Technique to Preserve Anatomy? A Series of Patients Compared to Patients Undergoing Standard Open RhinoplastyBertossi D, Marchetti A, Sbarbati A et al.2021PMID 33565827Summary