Reconstructive and restorative cues improve public perception on the value of plastic and reconstructive surgeries

Xun, Helen; Lee, Erica; Yesantharao, Pooja; Eter, Leen El; Kraezlin, Franca; Persing, Sarah; Sacks, Justin M.

doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2021.02.012

Cited by 1 publication

(4 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(4) Standardizing patient microsurgery education: Discussions surrounding patient counseling should be further promoted at national conferences such as the ASRM meeting. Elements would include common/universal language and positive correlation cues 3 , common questions and responses, misconceptions, and cultural, language, and health literacy fluid counseling techniques. This may also include the use of tabletop models for visualization, and "to-scale" examples.…”

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fifty-three percent of participants believe that general surgeons might perform microsurgery, while only 28% believed that plastic and reconstructive surgeons might perform microsurgery (►Fig. 3). When asked which procedures required microsurgery, only 28%, 41%, and 41% of respondents correctly identified head and neck reconstruction, breast reconstruction, and finger replantation.…”

Section: Surgery Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2 Additionally, the misperception that PRS practice is solely cosmetic and not reconstructive or that procedures do not improve quality of life further devalues the field. 3 This concept is perpetuated by the media, social media, and advertisements, which may only expose the public to a select segment of plastic surgery practice. 1 4 However, education, emphasis on reconstructive surgery, and use of nonstigmatizing language can increase public value and understanding of, as well as acceptance and willingness to pursue, plastic surgery procedures, including insurance coverage.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 4 However, education, emphasis on reconstructive surgery, and use of nonstigmatizing language can increase public value and understanding of, as well as acceptance and willingness to pursue, plastic surgery procedures, including insurance coverage. 3 Therefore, it would likely benefit the PRS community to address these myths and misconceptions to destigmatize the field, inspire public and patient confidence, and garner greater recognition of the critical role that PRS plays in patient care.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Misconceptions, Myths, and Mystery: A Cross-sectional Survey Study on Public Knowledge and Values of Microsurgery

Bustos

Xun

McLarney

et al. 2022

J Reconstr Microsurg

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Microsurgery is a foundational plastic surgery principle. However, public unawareness of microsurgery and its associated rigorous training in the USA, may contribute to current misconceptions and undervaluing of plastic and reconstructive surgeons (PRS). This study aims to characterize public knowledge of microsurgery. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from August to September 2021 using Amazon Mechanical Turk to assess baseline public knowledge of microsurgery. A multivariable logistic regression model was constructed to evaluate the association between baseline knowledge and demographic characteristics. Significance was set to a p<0.05. Results: A total of 516 responses were analyzed. The mean age was 36.7 SD 16.04 years (White 84%, and non-Hispanic 70%). Of those surveyed, 52% agreed that general surgeons perform microsurgery, while only 28% agreed that PRS perform microsurgery. When asked if head and neck reconstruction, breast reconstruction, and finger replantation required microsurgery, only 28%, 41%, and 41% of respondents agreed, respectively. When controlled for sociodemographic factors, Hispanics had significantly more odds to mistake that head and neck reconstruction did not require microsurgery (OR 0.49, 0.30–0.80, p 0.004) and less odds to consider PRS for reconstruction (OR 0.51, 0.32–0.84, p 0.008). Females had 1.63 more odds of considering PRS for reconstruction (1.09–2.43 p 0.017). Low-educated subjects had significantly more odds to consider general surgeons as those who performed reconstructive microsurgery (OR 8.70, 1.09–69.40, p 0.041) Conclusions: Misconceptions of microsurgery as a foundational principle of plastic surgery persist and correlate with undervaluing the specialty. Knowledge differs by ethnicity, level of education, and gender. Therefore, patient counseling should use culturally appropriate elements to demystify microsurgery, build value, and better inform risks and benefits.

show abstract

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Surgery Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%