title: Assessment Tools for Facial Rejuvenation Treatment: A Review.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  In the field of cosmetic medicine, patient satisfaction is an important and common indicator used to measure the efficacy of the treatment. However, it is insufficient to prove objectively that the benefit of the specific factors involved in the cosmetic outcomes. The practitioner should be aware of these assessment tools, in particular in case of demanding or litigious patients.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this review was to establish a list and discuss the subjective and objective methods used to assess facial aesthetic rejuvenation treatments.
  
  
  METHODS
  A systematic literature search was performed using the Pubmed search engine. Studies published over the last 5 years, i.e. between January 2010 and January 2015 were considered for review. The following keywords were used: "aesthetic treatment", "facial rejuvenation", and "subjective evaluation" or "objective evaluation".
  
  
  RESULTS
  Of the 446 articles identified by the search strategy, 47 articles focused specifically on facial rejuvenation and on the efficacy of aesthetic medical treatments were retrieved for review. Thirty-seven articles used quantitative methods to assess aesthetic treatment outcomes and only 12 used subjective methods. The different assessment methods were listed according to the tools used and treatment indications.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This review will help in choosing adequate methods to assess facial rejuvenation medical treatment. It is important to combine these tools adequately to improve the assessment. There is no current consensus on assess facial rejuvenation treatments but we noted that objective assessment methods seem helpful.
  
  
  METHODS
  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 .
authors.affiliation: Department of Maxillofacial and Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Henri Mondor Hospital, 51 avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, Créteil, 94010, France. Barbara.hersant@gmail.com.
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Hersant
authors.affiliation: Department of Maxillofacial and Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Henri Mondor Hospital, 51 avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, Créteil, 94010, France.
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Abbou
authors.affiliation: Department of Maxillofacial and Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Henri Mondor Hospital, 51 avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, Créteil, 94010, France.
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: SidAhmed-Mezi
authors.affiliation: Department of Maxillofacial and Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Henri Mondor Hospital, 51 avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, Créteil, 94010, France.
authors.forename: J P
authors.initials: JP
authors.lastname: Meningaud
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D003357:Cosmetic Techniques; D004954:Esthetics; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017060:Patient Satisfaction / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D012060:Rejuvenation / Q000502:physiology* / Q000523:psychology; D015361:Rhytidoplasty / Q000379:methods*; D015595:Skin Aging; D016896:Treatment Outcome
keywords: Aesthetic treatment; Facial rejuvenation; Objective evaluation; Subjective evaluation