Skip to main content
Log in

Introducing the Body-QoL®: A New Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument for Measuring Body Satisfaction-Related Quality of Life in Aesthetic and Post-bariatric Body Contouring Patients

  • Original Article
  • Aesthetic
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To develop a new patient-reported outcome instrument (PRO) to measure body-related satisfaction quality of life (QoL).

Methods

Standard 3-phase PRO design was followed; in the first phase, a qualitative design was used in 45 patients to develop a conceptual framework and to create preliminary scale domains and items. In phase 2, large-scale population testing on 1340 subjects was performed to reduce items and domains. In phase 3, final testing of the developed instrument on 34 patients was performed. Statistics used include Factor, RASCH, and multivariate regression analysis. Psychometric properties measured were internal reliability, item-rest, item-test, and test–retest correlations.

Results

The PRO-developed instrument is composed of four domains (satisfaction with the abdomen, sex life, self-esteem and social life, and physical symptoms) and 20 items in total. The score can range from 20 (worst) to 100 (best). Responsiveness was 100 %, internal reliability 93.3 %, and test–retest concordance 97.7 %. Body image-related QoL was superior in men than women (p < 0.001) and decreased with increasing age (p = 0.004) and BMI (p < 0.001). Post-bariatric body contouring patients score lower than cosmetic patients in all domains of the Body-QoL instrument (p < 0.001). After surgery, the score improves by on average 21.9 ± 16.9 (effect size 1.8, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Body satisfaction-related QoL can be measured reliably with the Body-QoL instrument. It can be used to quantify the improvement in cosmetic and post-bariatric patients including non- or minimally invasive procedures, suction assisted lipectomy, abdominoplasty, lipoabdominoplasty, and lower body lift and to give an evidence-based approach to standard practice.

Level of Evidence I

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chung KC, Ram AN (2009) Evidence-based medicine: the fourth revolution in American medicine? Plast Reconstr Surg 123:389–398

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chassin MR, Galvin RW (1998) The urgent need to improve health care quality. Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality. JAMA 280:1000–1005

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Offer GJ, Perks AG (2000) In search of evidence-based plastic surgery: the problems faced by the specialty. Br J Plast Surg 53:427–433

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rossouw JE, Anderson GL, Prentice RL et al (2002) Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the Women’s Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA 288:321–333

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gilbert R, Salanti G, Harden M, See S (2005) Infant sleeping position and the sudden infant death syndrome: systematic review of observational studies and historical review of recommendations from 1940 to 2002. Int J Epidemiol 34:874–887

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hulley S, Cummings S, Browner W, Grady D, Hearst N, Newman T (2001) Designing clinical research, an epidemiologic approach, 2nd edn. Lippinkott Williams and Wilkin, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt G, Tugwell P (1991) Clinical epidemiology. a basic science for clinical medicine, 2nd edn. Little, Brown and Company, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  8. Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Scott A, Johnson J, Pusic AL (2012) Satisfaction and quality-of-life issues in body contouring surgery patients: a qualitative study. Obes Surg 22:1527–1534

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Danilla S, Dominguez C, Cuevas P, Calderón ME, Rios MA, Andrades P, Benitez S, Erazo C, Shulz R, Al-Himdani S, Sepúlveda S (2014) The Body-QoL®: measuring patient reported outcomes in body contouring surgery patients. Aesthetic Plast Surg 38:575–583

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Streiner D, Norman G (2008) Health measurement scales, a practical guide for their development and use, 4th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Fletcher R, Fletcher S, Wagner E (1996) Clinical Epidemiology, the essentials, 3rd edn. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pusic AL, Lemaine V, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Cano SJ (2011) Patient-reported outcome measures in plastic surgery: use and interpretation in evidence-based medicine. Plast Reconstr Surg 127:1361–1367

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Reavey PL, Klassen AF, Cano SJ, McCarthy C, Scott A, Rubin JP, Shermak M, Pusic AL (2011) Measuring quality of life and patient satisfaction after body contouring: a systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures. Aesthet Surg J 31:807–813

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jabir S (2013) Assessing improvement in quality of life and patient satisfaction following body contouring surgery in patients with massive weight loss: a critical review of outcome measures employed. Plast Surg Int. doi:10.1155/2013/515737

    Google Scholar 

  15. World Medical Association (2013) World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 310:2191–2194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Johnson C, Aaronson N, Blazeby J, Bottomley A, Fayers P, Koller M et al (2011) Guidelines for developing questionnaire modules, 4th edn. EORTC Quality of Life Group, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  17. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) (2009). Guidance for industry, patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Document availiability: http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm

  18. Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NM et al (1992) Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ 305:160–164

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Azin A, Zhou C, Jackson T, Cassin S, Sockalingam S, Hawa R (2014) Body contouring surgery after bariatric surgery: a study of cost as a barrier and impact on psychological well-being. Plast Reconstr Surg 133:776e–782e

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. van der Beek ES, Geenen R, de Heer FA, van der Molen AB, van Ramshorst B (2012) Quality of life long-term after body contouring surgery following bariatric surgery: sustained improvement after 7 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 130:1133–1139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Balagué N, Combescure C, Huber O, Pittet-Cuénod B, Modarressi A (2013) Plastic surgery improves long-term weight control after bariatric surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:826–833

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Staalesen T, Fagevik Olsén M, Elander A (2013) Experience of excess skin and desire for body contouring surgery in post-bariatric patients. Obes Surg 23:1632–1644

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Singh D, Zahiri HR, Janes LE, Sabino J, Matthews JA, Bell RL, Thomson JG (2012) Mental and physical impact of body contouring procedures on post-bariatric surgery patients. Eplasty 12:e47

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Modarressi A, Balagué N, Huber O, Chilcott M, Pittet-Cuénod B (2013) Plastic surgery after gastric bypass improves long-term quality of life. Obes Surg 23:24–30

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Luppino FS, de Wit LM, Bouvy PF, Stijnen T, Cuijpers P, Penninx BW, Zitman FG (2010) Overweight, obesity, and depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Arch Gen Psychiatry 67(3):220–229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Herva A, Laitinen J, Miettunen J, Veijola J, Karvonen JT, Läksy K, Joukamaa M (2006) Obesity and depression: results from the longitudinal Northern Finland 1966 Birth Cohort Study. Int J Obes 30(3):520–527

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Department of Mental Health and Substance Dependence, World Health Organization (2012). gender disparities in mental health: the facts. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/66539/1/WHO_MSD_MDP_00.1.pdf. Accessed 1 Oct 2015

  28. Chaker Z, Chang FM, Hakim-Larson J (2015) Body satisfaction, thin-ideal internalization, and perceived pressure to be thin among Canadian women: the role of acculturation and religiosity. Body Image 14:85–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lev-Ari L, Baumgarten-Katz I, Zohar AH (2014) Mirror, mirror on the wall: how women learn body dissatisfaction. Eat Behav 15(3):397–402

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nerini A, Matera C, Stefanile C (2014) Psychosocial predictors in consideration of cosmetic surgery among women. Aesthet Plast Surg 38(2):461–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Yean C, Benau EM, Dakanalis A, Hormes JM, Perone J, Timko CA (2013) The relationship of sex and sexual orientation to self-esteem, body shape satisfaction, and eating disorder symptomatology. Front Psychol 27(4):887

    Google Scholar 

  32. ISAPS International Survey on Aesthetic/Cosmetic Procedures Performed in 2014. http://www.isaps.org/Media/Default/global-statistics/2015%20ISAPS%20Results.pdf. Accessed 1 Oct 2015

  33. Piccinelli M, Wilkinson G (2000) Gender differences in depression critical review. Br J Psychiatry 177:486–492

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge Dr. Graeme Perks for his enthusiastic and unconditional support, Dr. David Streiner for his wise advice, Cristina Di Silvestre M.Sc. for her help in the qualitative design and running phase 1a of the study, Solange Cortes R.N. for her hard work in performing, collecting, and transcribing the forms, and all of the General Surgery and Plastic Surgery residents at the University of Chile, who spent many hours filling forms and databases.

Financial disclosure

Stefan Danilla owns intellectual proprietary patent registry for Body-QoL®™ and Body-PROM®™. The Body-PROM® and its modules (Body-QoL, Body-PSSOAS and Body-PPDS) are free to use for academic and non-profit organization.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Danilla.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Danilla, S., Cuevas, P., Aedo, S. et al. Introducing the Body-QoL®: A New Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument for Measuring Body Satisfaction-Related Quality of Life in Aesthetic and Post-bariatric Body Contouring Patients. Aesth Plast Surg 40, 19–29 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-015-0586-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-015-0586-5

Keywords

Navigation