Satisfaction with Facial Appearance and Quality of Life after Treatment of Face Scars with a Transparent Facial Pressure Mask

Abstract

Treatment of facial hypertrophic scars and deformities has developed from the use of elastic fabric hoods to transparent facemasks. The clinical effects of these masks have been described. However, the psychological impact of wearing such a mask is not well documented. The aim of this study was to assess patients' satisfaction with their current facial appearance, to assess the end result of facemask therapy, and to assess the decision to have undergone facemask therapy by means of four different FACE-Q questionnaires. Out of the eligible 87 patients who completed the facemask therapy between January 2012 and November 2017, 42 filled out the questionnaires. These patients wore a custom-fabricated facemask because of facial hypertrophic scars and severe postsurgical facial irregularities. Patients who wore the mask 12 to 16 hours per day were significantly more satisfied with the end result compared with those who wore it 4 to 8 hours daily. Also, patients who wore the mask 8 to 12 and 12 to 16 hours each day were more satisfied to have undergone therapy compared with those who wore it 4 to 8 hours daily. Furthermore, patients who finished therapy 3 to 4 years and 4 to 5 years ago reported a significant higher satisfaction with facial appearance compared with those who completed therapy in a time period shorter than 1 year ago. Patients who finished therapy 3 to 4 years ago reported higher satisfaction with their facial appearance compared with those who finished therapy 2 to 3 years ago. Additionally, the Patient and Observer Scar Assessments Score (POSAS) showed a significant reduction between start and end of therapy. This study shows facemask therapy to result in long-lasting stable results. It also shows a longer daily wearing of the facemask to result in the highest satisfaction according to patients.

Keywords

facemask - scars - quality of life

• References

• 1 Wei Y, Li-Tsang CW, Liu J, Xie L, Yue S. 3D-printed transparent facemasks in the treatment of facial hypertrophic scars of young children with burns. Burns 2017; 43 (03) e19-e26
• 2 Leon-Villapalos J, Jeschke MG, Herndon DN. Topical management of facial burns. Burns 2008; 34 (07) 903-911
• 3 Powell BW, Haylock C, Clarke JA. A semi-rigid transparent face mask in the treatment of postburn hypertrophic scars. Br J Plast Surg 1985; 38 (04) 561-566
• 4 Giele HP, Currie K, Wood FM, Hansen H. Early use of pressure masks to avoid facial contracture during the pregrafting phase. J Burn Care Rehabil 1995; 16 (06) 641-645
• 5 Parry I, Hanley C, Niszczak J, Sen S, Palmieri T, Greenhalgh D. Harnessing the transparent face orthosis for facial scar management: a comparison of methods. Burns 2013; 39 (05) 950-956
• 6 Wei Y, Wang Y, Zhang M. , et al. The application of 3D-printed transparent facemask for facial scar management and its biomechanical rationale. Burns 2017; S0305-4179(17)30433-3
• 7 Rivers EA, Strate RG, Solem LD. The transparent face mask. Am J Occup Ther 1979; 33 (02) 108-113
• 8 Kant SB, Ferdinandus PI, Van den Kerckhove EV. , et al. A new treatment for reliable functional and esthetic outcome after local facial flap reconstruction: a transparent polycarbonate facial mask with silicone sheeting. Eur J Plast Surg 2017; 40 (05) 407-416
• 9 Van den Kerckhove E, Fieuws S, Massagé P. , et al. Reproducibility of repeated measurements with the Kikuhime pressure sensor under pressure garments in burn scar treatment. Burns 2007; 33 (05) 572-578
• 10 Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Schwitzer JA, Scott AM, Pusic AL. FACE-Q scales for health-related quality of life, early life impact, satisfaction with outcomes, and decision to have treatment: development and validation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 135 (02) 375-386
• 11 Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Scott A, Snell L, Pusic AL. Measuring patient-reported outcomes in facial aesthetic patients: development of the FACE-Q. Facial Plast Surg 2010; 26 (04) 303-309
• 12 van de Kar AL, Corion LU, Smeulders MJ, Draaijers LJ, van der Horst CM, van Zuijlen PP. Reliable and feasible evaluation of linear scars by the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Plast Reconstr Surg 2005; 116 (02) 514-522
• 13 Draaijers LJ, Tempelman FR, Botman YA. , et al. The patient and observer scar assessment scale: a reliable and feasible tool for scar evaluation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 113 (07) 1960-1965 , discussion 1966–1967
• 14 Baum CL, Arpey CJ. Normal cutaneous wound healing: clinical correlation with cellular and molecular events. Dermatol Surg 2005; 31 (06) 674-686 , discussion 686
• 15 Reish RG, Eriksson E. Scar treatments: preclinical and clinical studies. J Am Coll Surg 2008; 206 (04) 719-730
• 16 Johnson J, Greenspan B, Gorga D, Nagler W, Goodwin C. Compliance with pressure garment use in burn rehabilitation. J Burn Care Rehabil 1994; 15 (02) 180-188
• 17 Stewart R, Bhagwanjee AM, Mbakaza Y, Binase T. Pressure garment adherence in adult patients with burn injuries: an analysis of patient and clinician perceptions. Am J Occup Ther 2000; 54 (06) 598-606
• 18 Candy LH, Cecilia LT, Ping ZY. Effect of different pressure magnitudes on hypertrophic scar in a Chinese population. Burns 2010; 36 (08) 1234-1241
• 19 Pilley MJ, Hitchens C, Rose G, Alexander S, Wimpenny DI. The use of non-contact structured light scanning in burns pressure splint construction. Burns 2011; 37 (07) 1168-1173
• 20 Shons AR, Rivers EA, Solem LD. A rigid transparent face mask for control of scar hypertrophy. Ann Plast Surg 1981; 6 (03) 245-248
• 21 Serghiou MA, Holmes CL, McCauley RL. A survey of current rehabilitation trends for burn injuries to the head and neck. J Burn Care Rehabil 2004; 25 (06) 514-518