Anne F Klassen, Charlene Rae, Lucas Gallo, Stefan Cano, Manraj Kaur, Steven Dayan, Katie Armstrong, Lotte Poulsen, Elena Tsangaris, Katherine B Santosa, Andrea L Pusic
{"title":"Measuring Satisfaction With Minimally Invasive Aesthetic Treatments With the SKIN-Q Treatment Outcome Scale.","authors":"Anne F Klassen, Charlene Rae, Lucas Gallo, Stefan Cano, Manraj Kaur, Steven Dayan, Katie Armstrong, Lotte Poulsen, Elena Tsangaris, Katherine B Santosa, Andrea L Pusic","doi":"10.1093/asj/sjaf075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A key outcome in aesthetic treatments is the patient's view of how their skin looks and feels after a treatment.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To add a Treatment Outcome scale to the SKIN-Q patient-reported outcome measure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Concept elicitation interviews were performed with patients recruited from clinics in Canada and the USA. Data were coded, analyzed, and used to draft a Treatment Outcome scale. The scale was refined with patient and expert feedback and field tested in an online sample (i.e., Prolific). Rasch measurement and classical test theory psychometric analyses were performed to examine scale reliability and validity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The concept elicitation interviews included 26 participants. The first draft of the Treatment Outcome scale included 32 items that assessed changes in appearance (e.g., look better) and wellbeing (e.g., feel more confident). Items were revised with input from 12 experts, 11 patients, and 174 online participants who had aesthetic face and/or body treatments and provided 180 survey responses, resulting in 36 items. Prolific data were collected from 499 participants who provided 542 assessments. The sample comprised 80.6% women; 78.8% had a facial treatment, 11.4% had a body treatment, and 9.8% had both a facial and body treatment. Data for a final 10-item Treatment Outcome scale fit the Rasch model (Chi-square = 50.46, df=40, p=0.124). The scale evidenced high reliability, with a person separation index and Cronbach alpha values >0.87. A total of 20/22 (91%) pre-defined construct validation hypotheses were accepted. A total of 136 participants completed the Treatment Outcome scale a second time within 7-14 days. The intraclass correlation coefficient for the test-retest was 0.89 (95% CI 0.85, 0.92).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This new SKIN-Q scale can be used alongside other patient-centered outcome tools to measure how patients look and feel after minimally invasive aesthetic treatments for the body and/or face.</p>","PeriodicalId":7728,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjaf075","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: A key outcome in aesthetic treatments is the patient's view of how their skin looks and feels after a treatment.
Objectives: To add a Treatment Outcome scale to the SKIN-Q patient-reported outcome measure.
Methods: Concept elicitation interviews were performed with patients recruited from clinics in Canada and the USA. Data were coded, analyzed, and used to draft a Treatment Outcome scale. The scale was refined with patient and expert feedback and field tested in an online sample (i.e., Prolific). Rasch measurement and classical test theory psychometric analyses were performed to examine scale reliability and validity.
Results: The concept elicitation interviews included 26 participants. The first draft of the Treatment Outcome scale included 32 items that assessed changes in appearance (e.g., look better) and wellbeing (e.g., feel more confident). Items were revised with input from 12 experts, 11 patients, and 174 online participants who had aesthetic face and/or body treatments and provided 180 survey responses, resulting in 36 items. Prolific data were collected from 499 participants who provided 542 assessments. The sample comprised 80.6% women; 78.8% had a facial treatment, 11.4% had a body treatment, and 9.8% had both a facial and body treatment. Data for a final 10-item Treatment Outcome scale fit the Rasch model (Chi-square = 50.46, df=40, p=0.124). The scale evidenced high reliability, with a person separation index and Cronbach alpha values >0.87. A total of 20/22 (91%) pre-defined construct validation hypotheses were accepted. A total of 136 participants completed the Treatment Outcome scale a second time within 7-14 days. The intraclass correlation coefficient for the test-retest was 0.89 (95% CI 0.85, 0.92).
Conclusions: This new SKIN-Q scale can be used alongside other patient-centered outcome tools to measure how patients look and feel after minimally invasive aesthetic treatments for the body and/or face.
期刊介绍：
Aesthetic Surgery Journal is a peer-reviewed international journal focusing on scientific developments and clinical techniques in aesthetic surgery. The official publication of The Aesthetic Society, ASJ is also the official English-language journal of many major international societies of plastic, aesthetic and reconstructive surgery representing South America, Central America, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. It is also the official journal of the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, the Canadian Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and The Rhinoplasty Society.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
