↓ Skip to main content

Secondary correction of nasal deformities in cleft lip and palate patients: surgical technique and outcome evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in Head & Face Medicine, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Secondary correction of nasal deformities in cleft lip and palate patients: surgical technique and outcome evaluation
Published in
Head & Face Medicine, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13005-016-0132-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabor Vass, Gabor Mohos, Zsofia Bere, Laszlo Ivan, Janos Varga, Jozsef Piffko, Laszlo Rovo

Abstract

Nasal deformity associated with cleft lip and palate is a highly challenging reconstructive problem in rhinoplasty. In the literature, several operative solutions and evaluation methods have been described, however these do not offer a standard procedure for the surgeon. Our aim was to standardize our surgical technique-as much as the uniqueness of each case allowed it-based on the most frequent deformities we had faced; and to evaluate our results via a postoperative patient satisfaction questionnaire. Between 2012 and 2014 12 consecutive patients with combined cleft lip and palate deformities underwent secondary nasal and septal correction surgery with the same method by the same surgeon. The indications of surgery were, on one hand, difficult nasal breathing and altered nasal function (tendency for chronic rhinosinusitis) and on the other hand the aesthetic look of the nose. No exclusion criteria were stated. In our follow-up study we evaluated our results by using a modified Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire: patients answered the same four questions pre- and postoperatively. Data were statistically analyzed by t-test. Based on the questionnaire, all patients experienced improvement of nasal breathing function, improved appearance of the nose and less stigmatization from the society. According to the t-test, all scores of the four questions improved significantly in the postoperative 4-6 months, compared with the preoperative scores. In our opinion with our standardized surgical steps satisfactory aesthetic and functional results can be achieved. We think the modified ROE questionnaire is an adequate and simple method for the evaluation of our surgical results.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 4 17%
Other 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 5 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 46%
Sports and Recreations 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 December 2016.
All research outputs
#4,765,024
of 8,806,948 outputs
Outputs from Head & Face Medicine
#66
of 214 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,480
of 303,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Head & Face Medicine
#5
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,806,948 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 214 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 303,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.