Assessing Patient Satisfaction Following Otoplasty: A Social Media Analysis

Résumé fourni par la source

Background: Otoplasty is a commonly performed cosmetic ear procedure, yet patient-reported outcome data remain limited. This study analyzes otoplasty reviews on RealSelf, a widely used aesthetic review platform that provides insight into patient experiences and outcomes. Methods: A retrospective review of otoplasty-related posts on RealSelf from January 2009 to March 2025 was performed. Reviews were manually screened and coded independently by reviewers. Extracted variables included demographics, procedure location, surgeon specialty, anesthesia type, postoperative pain, satisfaction rating (“Worth It,” “Not Worth It,” “Not Sure”), cost, motivations for surgery, and reasons for choosing the surgeon. Results: A total of 615 reviews met inclusion criteria, and 90.7% rated the procedure as “Worth It.” Protruding ears were the most common motivation for surgery (55.1%), followed by ear asymmetry (17.0%). Surgeon selection was most influenced by the consultation experience (34.4%), credentials (24.8%), and online reviews (21.6%). Positive surgeon comments emphasized comfort (32.3%), personality (27.9%), and communication (25.1%). Satisfaction was significantly associated with postoperative pain level (p < 0.001) and improved confidence after surgery (p = 0.032), but not with age, gender, procedure location, anesthesia type, or cost. Improved confidence (38.5%), enhanced ear shape (27.8%), and natural-appearing results (17.4%) were the most frequently cited reasons for being satisfied with otoplasty. Conclusion: Patient-reported satisfaction with otoplasty on RealSelf is high and is associated with favorable aesthetic results, improved self-confidence, and positive surgeon–patient interactions. In this cohort, effective communication, realistic expectation setting, and postoperative pain management were central to optimizing the patient experience.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.