Abstract
Background
Recent data show that aesthetic surgery research is lagging in comparison to reconstructive surgery: research funding and institutional disparities within aesthetic surgery are potential factors in this trend.
Objectives
To determine if disparities exist in aesthetic surgery research based on funding sources or practice settings.
Methods
Aesthetic Surgery Journal articles from 2009-2019 were reviewed. Chi-square, t-test, bivariate and multivariate regression analyses evaluated research trends.
Results
A total of 2,262 publications were identified, with 318 funded articles meeting inclusion criteria. Majority of studies (294, 92%) received external funding, with 281 (88%) being supported solely by external funds. Externally funded studies were financed by private industry (194, 66%), foundations/societies (53, 18%), government grants (23, 8%), or a combination of agencies (24, 8%). Majority of funded studies were at academic institutions (266, 84%), followed by private practice (46, 14%) and private industry (6, 2%). Analysis of annual publications revealed a rising percentage of academic-based research, which correlated with decreasing research from private practice (r= -0.95, r 2= 0.89, P<0.001). Compared to academic institutions, private practice relied more heavily on industry funding (55% vs. 87% respectively, P=0.001), exhibiting lower rates of foundational/societal (20% vs. 2%), governmental (9% vs. 0%), combined (8% vs. 7%), and internal department funding (8% vs. 4%). Article citations and level of evidence were unaffected by funding source, agency, or practice setting.
Conclusions
Lack of diversity in research funding among private practice surgeons may explain the reported discrepancies that currently exist between aesthetic and reconstructive surgery research.
An Update on the Level of Evidence for Plastic Surgery Research Published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
