Rhinoplasty Education During Residency: Discussion of Current Barriers, Challenges, and Opportunities for Improvement

Khetpal S, Hall AE, Ibrahim Y, Nabili V, Delong MR, Roostaeian J.

PubMed 41629468 Publisher (DOI)Free full text (PMC)

What this paper says

A scoping review of 13 studies finds that 3D-printed models and surgical simulators are the most studied supplements to operating-room rhinoplasty teaching, mostly evaluated by resident confidence surveys.

Overview

Rhinoplasty exposure varies widely across plastic surgery and otolaryngology training programmes. The UCLA authors searched PubMed/MEDLINE for methods used outside the operating room to teach the technical and clinical aspects of rhinoplasty, including only studies that reported outcomes.

Sections of note

13 studies included.
Most discussed 3D-printed models and surgical simulators; others covered cadaver laboratories, structured educational programmes and video-assisted learning.
Outcomes were mainly surveys of confidence before and after, knowledge tests and perceived usefulness.
Simulators are described as "highly effective and valuable" for practising manoeuvres.
Future directions: artificial intelligence and software tools. Level of Evidence IV.

What it means for a patient

Surgeons in training may have had little hands-on rhinoplasty experience; simulators are how programmes are trying to fix that.
Ask a surgeon about fellowship training and case volume, since residency exposure alone is variable.
Outcome evidence for these teaching tools is mostly self-reported confidence.

Why this paper matters

It maps the state of rhinoplasty education research. Limits: 13 heterogeneous studies, one database, soft outcome measures.

Terms

Scoping review: a broad survey of the literature on a topic without formal pooling.
Surgical simulator: a physical or virtual model for practising operative steps.
Residency: the multi-year postgraduate training period for surgeons.
Video-assisted learning: teaching with recorded surgical videos.

Summary written by rhinoplasty.cc from the abstract, 2026-09-08; not medical advice. The authors' own abstract follows.

Abstract

Background: Rhinoplasty is a complex operation that warrants careful consideration of both functional and aesthetic principles. Despite its prevalence within plastic surgery and otolaryngology-head and neck surgery fields-its exposure and education are highly variable among training programs. The purpose of this study is to identify the various supplemental methods utilized outside of the operating room for educating residents on the technical and clinical aspects of rhinoplasty and evaluate the outcomes associated with various educational approaches.

Methods: A scoping review was conducted using the PubMed/MEDLINE database using a combination of the following key terms: "rhinoplasty," "rhinoplasty education," and "resident training." Articles were included that 1) discussed methods of educating residents on the technical and clinical aspects of rhinoplasty and 2) reported outcomes to objectively assess such methods.

Results: Thirteen studies were included in the analysis. The majority of the studies discussed three-dimensional printed models and surgical simulators, followed by cadaver laboratories, detailed rhinoplasty educational programming, and video-assisted learning tools. In terms of assessed outcomes, surveys were utilized to assess residents' confidence before and after intervention, test their knowledge on various clinical aspects, and their perceived effectiveness of these tools.

Conclusion: This study highlights the various measures taken to provide education and instruction on rhinoplasty. Beyond intra-operating teaching and modeling, surgical simulators are highly effective and valuable for residents to practice technical maneuvers; however, future efforts leveraging artificial intelligence and software technologies can help further improve rhinoplasty education.

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 .

Abstract as indexed by PubMed; the article is open access (PubMed Central).