The SMAS and the Nasolabial Fold

1992 ◽  
Vol 89 (6) ◽  
pp. 1054-1057 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fritz E. Barton
Keyword(s):  
2020 ◽  

Purpose: Pain is a major symptom for patients to seek medical services, but limited evidence supports the applicability and usage of facial expressions as a pain measurement strategy in the emergency department (ED). In this study, we explored possible differences in facial expressions before and after pain management and compared these differences with those in a self-reported pain scale. Methods: In this observational study, convenience sampling of patients admitted to the ED was conducted. Two video sessions of facial expressions were recorded for each participant, and participants rated their painon a self-reported numeric rating scale (NRS). A total of 25 facial parameters were extracted per frame. The main outcome measurements were the differences in facial parameters, and their correlation with changes in NRS scores was examined. Results: This study included 163 participants. A stronger reduction in NRS scores was associated with differences in systolic blood pressure (sBPr = 0.247, P = 0.011) and the following changes in facial features: eye opening (left: r = -0.210, P = 0.007; right: r = -0.206, P = 0.008), eye aspect ratio (left: r = -0.382, P < 0.001; right: r = -0.305, P < 0.001), and head rotation angle (r = 0.218, P = 0.005). Pain improvement (a difference of ≥ 4 in NRS scores) was associated with differences in BP (sBP, odds ratio [OR] = 0.973, 95%confidence interval [CI]: 0.949-0.998, P = 0.034; dBP, OR = 1.078, 95% CI: 1.026-1.113, P = 0.003), eye aspect ratio (Left: β = 5.613, 95% CI: 2.234-14.104, P < 0.001; Right: β = 2.743, 95% CI: 1.395-5.391, P = 0.003), and nasolabial fold variation (β = 0.548, 95% CI: 0.306-0.982, P = 0.043), after adjustment for variables Conclusions: Intraindividual changes in facial expressions can be used to track clinically relevant differences in pain. Facial expressions alone cannot be used as a pain measurement strategy in the ED.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 50-52
Author(s):  
Daniel P. Bax ◽  
Alexandra E. Charos ◽  
David L. Chen ◽  
Anne M. Stowman
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Jeffrey Weinzweig ◽  
Marcello Pantaloni ◽  
Erik A. Hoy ◽  
Jhonny Salomon ◽  
Patrick K. Sullivan
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 681-682
Author(s):  
Charlotte Moreau ◽  
Thibault Kervarrec
Keyword(s):  

1997 ◽  
Vol 100 (5) ◽  
pp. 1276-1280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fritz E. Barton ◽  
Ildiko M. Gyimesi
Keyword(s):  

2012 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 488-494 ◽  
Author(s):  
Armando A. Davila ◽  
Donald W. Buck ◽  
David Chopp ◽  
Caitlin M. Connor ◽  
Scott Persing ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather R. Faulkner

The preferred methods for facial rejuvenation have been changing over the past decade, with operative procedures on the decline and minimally invasive, office-based procedures on the rise. As a result, it is critical for plastic surgery practitioners to understand the intricacies of the use of neuromodulators and soft tissue fillers in this milieu. While these procedures are usually performed in an office, without general anesthesia, the risk of significant complications still exists. The knowledge of facial anatomy, techniques, and pitfalls is essential for achieving high quality, predictable, and reproducible results. Likewise, when a complication arises, prompt recognition and appropriate treatment is paramount. In this chapter, the history, purpose, technical guidelines, and complications of adjunctive techniques for facial rejuvenation are reviewed in detail. This review contains 2 tables, and 52 references. Keywords: facial rejuvenation, neuromodulator, soft tissue filler, botulinum toxin, dermal filler, aging face, facial rhytids, filler complications, glabellar lines, nasolabial fold 


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document