眼面部整形与修复外科医生的执业范围:公众认知调查。

Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-30 DOI:10.1080/01676830.2024.2348015
Fabliha A Mukit, Emily Y Kim, Grant Hilliard, Sophie Pilkinton, Marc E Walker, Matthew W Wilson, Brian T Fowler
{"title":"眼面部整形与修复外科医生的执业范围:公众认知调查。","authors":"Fabliha A Mukit, Emily Y Kim, Grant Hilliard, Sophie Pilkinton, Marc E Walker, Matthew W Wilson, Brian T Fowler","doi":"10.1080/01676830.2024.2348015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study is to determine the public's perception of the scope of practice for oculofacial plastic and reconstructive surgeons (OFPRS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 49-question survey was distributed by Qualtrics<sup>Ⓡ</sup> to a panel similar to the US demographic composition. Responses collected underwent bivariate statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>A total of 530 responses were obtained, with most respondents being white, female, over the age of 35, from the Midwest, and with at least a college education or above. Most respondents did not think ophthalmologists or optometrists were surgeons, and only 158 people (29.8%) knew the primary specialty of OFPRS was ophthalmology. Board certification was preferred by 98.87% of respondents, and 95.28% preferred ASOPRS-trained OFPRS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study highlights the gap in knowledge about OFPRS as a field, the qualifications and training required, and the scope of practice. Notably, even for OFPRS-specific procedures, PRS remained the leading subspecialist chosen for interventions such as orbital decompression (58.5% vs. 71.5%), orbital reconstruction (57.9% vs. 74.2%), enucleation/evisceration (48.1% vs. 53.4%), optic nerve-related surgery (39.8% vs. 43.4%), orbital cancer resection (42.8% vs. 46.8%), and tear duct surgery (41.9% vs. 52.5%). Additionally, most respondents did not feel that facial fillers, laser skin resurfacing, eyelid cancer removal, or cataract surgery were within the OFPRS scope of practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scope of practice of oculofacial plastic and reconstructive surgeons: a public perception survey.\",\"authors\":\"Fabliha A Mukit, Emily Y Kim, Grant Hilliard, Sophie Pilkinton, Marc E Walker, Matthew W Wilson, Brian T Fowler\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01676830.2024.2348015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study is to determine the public's perception of the scope of practice for oculofacial plastic and reconstructive surgeons (OFPRS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 49-question survey was distributed by Qualtrics<sup>Ⓡ</sup> to a panel similar to the US demographic composition. Responses collected underwent bivariate statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>A total of 530 responses were obtained, with most respondents being white, female, over the age of 35, from the Midwest, and with at least a college education or above. Most respondents did not think ophthalmologists or optometrists were surgeons, and only 158 people (29.8%) knew the primary specialty of OFPRS was ophthalmology. Board certification was preferred by 98.87% of respondents, and 95.28% preferred ASOPRS-trained OFPRS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study highlights the gap in knowledge about OFPRS as a field, the qualifications and training required, and the scope of practice. Notably, even for OFPRS-specific procedures, PRS remained the leading subspecialist chosen for interventions such as orbital decompression (58.5% vs. 71.5%), orbital reconstruction (57.9% vs. 74.2%), enucleation/evisceration (48.1% vs. 53.4%), optic nerve-related surgery (39.8% vs. 43.4%), orbital cancer resection (42.8% vs. 46.8%), and tear duct surgery (41.9% vs. 52.5%). Additionally, most respondents did not feel that facial fillers, laser skin resurfacing, eyelid cancer removal, or cataract surgery were within the OFPRS scope of practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01676830.2024.2348015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01676830.2024.2348015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在确定公众对眼脸整形与重建外科医生(OFPRS)执业范围的看法:方法:QualtricsⓇ 向一个与美国人口构成相似的小组发放了一份包含 49 个问题的调查问卷。对收集到的答复进行了双变量统计分析:共收到 530 份回复,大多数受访者为白人、女性、35 岁以上、来自美国中西部、至少受过大学或以上教育。大多数受访者不认为眼科医生或视光师是外科医生,只有 158 人(29.8%)知道眼科外科医生协会的主要专业是眼科。98.87%的受访者希望获得委员会认证,95.28%的受访者希望接受过 ASOPRS 培训的 OFPRS:我们的研究凸显了人们对 OFPRS 这一领域、所需资格和培训以及执业范围的了解存在差距。值得注意的是,即使是针对眼科视网膜手术的特定手术,眼眶减压术(58.5% vs. 71.5%)、眼眶重建术(57.9% vs. 74.2%)、去核/切除术(48.1% vs. 53.4%)、视神经相关手术(39.8% vs. 43.4%)、眼眶癌切除术(42.8% vs. 46.8%)和泪道手术(41.9% vs. 52.5%)等手术中,眼科视网膜手术医师仍是主要的亚专科医师。此外,大多数受访者认为面部填充、激光换肤、眼睑癌切除或白内障手术不属于 OFPRS 的执业范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享
查看原文
Scope of practice of oculofacial plastic and reconstructive surgeons: a public perception survey.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine the public's perception of the scope of practice for oculofacial plastic and reconstructive surgeons (OFPRS).

Methods: A 49-question survey was distributed by Qualtrics to a panel similar to the US demographic composition. Responses collected underwent bivariate statistical analysis.

Result: A total of 530 responses were obtained, with most respondents being white, female, over the age of 35, from the Midwest, and with at least a college education or above. Most respondents did not think ophthalmologists or optometrists were surgeons, and only 158 people (29.8%) knew the primary specialty of OFPRS was ophthalmology. Board certification was preferred by 98.87% of respondents, and 95.28% preferred ASOPRS-trained OFPRS.

Conclusions: Our study highlights the gap in knowledge about OFPRS as a field, the qualifications and training required, and the scope of practice. Notably, even for OFPRS-specific procedures, PRS remained the leading subspecialist chosen for interventions such as orbital decompression (58.5% vs. 71.5%), orbital reconstruction (57.9% vs. 74.2%), enucleation/evisceration (48.1% vs. 53.4%), optic nerve-related surgery (39.8% vs. 43.4%), orbital cancer resection (42.8% vs. 46.8%), and tear duct surgery (41.9% vs. 52.5%). Additionally, most respondents did not feel that facial fillers, laser skin resurfacing, eyelid cancer removal, or cataract surgery were within the OFPRS scope of practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信