Scope of practice of oculofacial plastic and reconstructive surgeons: a public perception survey.

Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-30 DOI:10.1080/01676830.2024.2348015
Fabliha A Mukit, Emily Y Kim, Grant Hilliard, Sophie Pilkinton, Marc E Walker, Matthew W Wilson, Brian T Fowler
{"title":"Scope of practice of oculofacial plastic and reconstructive surgeons: a public perception survey.","authors":"Fabliha A Mukit, Emily Y Kim, Grant Hilliard, Sophie Pilkinton, Marc E Walker, Matthew W Wilson, Brian T Fowler","doi":"10.1080/01676830.2024.2348015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study is to determine the public's perception of the scope of practice for oculofacial plastic and reconstructive surgeons (OFPRS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 49-question survey was distributed by Qualtrics<sup>Ⓡ</sup> to a panel similar to the US demographic composition. Responses collected underwent bivariate statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>A total of 530 responses were obtained, with most respondents being white, female, over the age of 35, from the Midwest, and with at least a college education or above. Most respondents did not think ophthalmologists or optometrists were surgeons, and only 158 people (29.8%) knew the primary specialty of OFPRS was ophthalmology. Board certification was preferred by 98.87% of respondents, and 95.28% preferred ASOPRS-trained OFPRS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study highlights the gap in knowledge about OFPRS as a field, the qualifications and training required, and the scope of practice. Notably, even for OFPRS-specific procedures, PRS remained the leading subspecialist chosen for interventions such as orbital decompression (58.5% vs. 71.5%), orbital reconstruction (57.9% vs. 74.2%), enucleation/evisceration (48.1% vs. 53.4%), optic nerve-related surgery (39.8% vs. 43.4%), orbital cancer resection (42.8% vs. 46.8%), and tear duct surgery (41.9% vs. 52.5%). Additionally, most respondents did not feel that facial fillers, laser skin resurfacing, eyelid cancer removal, or cataract surgery were within the OFPRS scope of practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01676830.2024.2348015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine the public's perception of the scope of practice for oculofacial plastic and reconstructive surgeons (OFPRS).

Methods: A 49-question survey was distributed by Qualtrics to a panel similar to the US demographic composition. Responses collected underwent bivariate statistical analysis.

Result: A total of 530 responses were obtained, with most respondents being white, female, over the age of 35, from the Midwest, and with at least a college education or above. Most respondents did not think ophthalmologists or optometrists were surgeons, and only 158 people (29.8%) knew the primary specialty of OFPRS was ophthalmology. Board certification was preferred by 98.87% of respondents, and 95.28% preferred ASOPRS-trained OFPRS.

Conclusions: Our study highlights the gap in knowledge about OFPRS as a field, the qualifications and training required, and the scope of practice. Notably, even for OFPRS-specific procedures, PRS remained the leading subspecialist chosen for interventions such as orbital decompression (58.5% vs. 71.5%), orbital reconstruction (57.9% vs. 74.2%), enucleation/evisceration (48.1% vs. 53.4%), optic nerve-related surgery (39.8% vs. 43.4%), orbital cancer resection (42.8% vs. 46.8%), and tear duct surgery (41.9% vs. 52.5%). Additionally, most respondents did not feel that facial fillers, laser skin resurfacing, eyelid cancer removal, or cataract surgery were within the OFPRS scope of practice.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
眼面部整形与修复外科医生的执业范围:公众认知调查。
目的:本研究旨在确定公众对眼脸整形与重建外科医生(OFPRS)执业范围的看法:方法:QualtricsⓇ 向一个与美国人口构成相似的小组发放了一份包含 49 个问题的调查问卷。对收集到的答复进行了双变量统计分析:共收到 530 份回复,大多数受访者为白人、女性、35 岁以上、来自美国中西部、至少受过大学或以上教育。大多数受访者不认为眼科医生或视光师是外科医生,只有 158 人(29.8%)知道眼科外科医生协会的主要专业是眼科。98.87%的受访者希望获得委员会认证,95.28%的受访者希望接受过 ASOPRS 培训的 OFPRS:我们的研究凸显了人们对 OFPRS 这一领域、所需资格和培训以及执业范围的了解存在差距。值得注意的是,即使是针对眼科视网膜手术的特定手术,眼眶减压术(58.5% vs. 71.5%)、眼眶重建术(57.9% vs. 74.2%)、去核/切除术(48.1% vs. 53.4%)、视神经相关手术(39.8% vs. 43.4%)、眼眶癌切除术(42.8% vs. 46.8%)和泪道手术(41.9% vs. 52.5%)等手术中,眼科视网膜手术医师仍是主要的亚专科医师。此外,大多数受访者认为面部填充、激光换肤、眼睑癌切除或白内障手术不属于 OFPRS 的执业范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1