Treffer: Time and Expertise in Open Structural Rhinoplasty: A Task-Based Analysis Using Hierarchical Task Analysis and Machine Learning.
Original Publication: Burlington, Ont. : B.C. Decker, c1990-
Dobratz EJ, Tran V, Hilger PA. Comparison of techniques used to support the nasal tip and their long-term effects on tip position. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2010;12:172–179.
De Ruiter BJ, Lesko RP, Davidson EH. Standardized schematics for facial trauma planning: a clinical education tool. J Craniofac Surg 2020;31:1297.
Ali YH, Alandejani T. Rhinoplasty assisted by endoscopic septoplasty: precise job and an educational tool. J Craniofac Surg 2020;31:847–850.
Guo J, Zhang X, Xu Y, et al. Learning curve analysis of full-length costal cartilage harvesting by plastic surgery residents: a retrospective study. J Craniofac Surg 2023;34:e594.
Mauch JT, Shubinets V, Chang B, et al. Searching for an alternative method to evaluate surgical knowledge: does a drawing and labeling quiz predict in-service exam performance and enhance learning? J Craniofac Surg 2020;31:904–907.
Zammit D, Ponnudurai N, Safran T, et al. Reevaluating the current model of rhinoplasty training and future directions: a role for focused, maneuver-specific simulation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019;144:597e–605e.
Stone DH, Upchurch GR, Scali ST. Surgeon credentialing should reflect real-world practice outcomes rather than arbitrary minimum-volume benchmarks. JAMA Surg 2021;156:597–598.
Demirel D, Yu A, Cooper-Baer S, et al. A hierarchical task analysis of shoulder arthroscopy for a virtual arthroscopic tear diagnosis and evaluation platform (VATDEP). Int J Med Robot 2017;13:e1799.
Dials J, Demirel D, Sanchez-Arias R, et al. Skill-level classification and performance evaluation for endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty. Surg Endosc 2023;37:4754–4765.
Lee JA, Close MF, Liu YF, et al. Using intraoperative recordings to evaluate surgical technique and performance in mastoidectomy. JAMA Otolaryngol Neck Surg 2020;146:893–899.
Demirel D, Butler KL, Halic T, et al. A hierarchical task analysis of cricothyroidotomy procedure for a virtual airway skills trainer simulator. Am J Surg 2016;212:475–484.
Daniel RK. The preservation rhinoplasty: a new rhinoplasty revolution. Aesthet Surg J 2018;38:228–229. Accessed December 24, 2024. https://academic.oup.com/asj/article-abstract/38/2/228/4793278.
Patel PN, Abdelwahab M, Most SP. A review and modification of dorsal preservation rhinoplasty techniques. Facial Plast Surg Aesthetic Med 2020;22:71–79.
Toriumi DM. Nasal tip contouring: anatomic basis for management. Facial Plast Surg Aesthetic Med 2020;22:10–24.
Rohrich RJ, Ahmad J. A practical approach to rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016;137:725e–746e.
Rohrich RJ, Afrooz PN. Primary open rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019;144:102e–117e.
Çakir B, Öreroğlu AR, Doğan T, et al. A complete subperichondrial dissection technique for rhinoplasty with management of the nasal ligaments. Aesthet Surg J 2012;32:564–574.
Ponsky D, Eshraghi Y, Guyuron B. The frequency of surgical maneuvers during open rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;126:240–244.
Tasman AJ. Rhinoplasty–indications and techniques. GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008;6:Doc09.
Masarotto G, Varin C Gaussian copula marginal regression. Published online 2012. Accessed January 1, 2025. https://projecteuclid.org/journals/electronic-journal-of-statistics/volume-6/issue-none/Gaussian-copula-marginal-regression/10.1214/12-EJS721.short.
Tasman AJ. Rhinoplasty – indications and techniques. GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008;6. Accessed May 22, 2021. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3199847/.
Rigatti SJ. Random forest. J Insur Med 2017;47:31–39.
Dongare AD, Kharde RR, Kachare AD. Introduction to artificial neural network. Int J Eng Innov Technol IJEIT 2012;2:189–194.
Ke G, Meng Q, Finley T, et al. Lightgbm: a highly efficient gradient boosting decision tree. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 2017;30:3146–3154.
Geurts P, Ernst D, Wehenkel L. Extremely randomized trees. Mach Learn 2006;63:3–42.
Celikoyar MM, Aslan CG, Cinar F. An effective method for videorecording the nasal–dorsal part of a rhinoplasty – a multiple case study. J Vis Commun Med 2016;39(3-4):112–119.
Cetinsaya B, Gromski MA, Lee S, et al. A task and performance analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) surgery. Surg Endosc 2019;33:592–606.
Curtis NJ, Foster JD, Miskovic D, et al. Association of surgical skill assessment with clinical outcomes in cancer surgery. JAMA Surg 2020;155:590–598.
Celikoyar MM, Nickas B, Dobratz E, et al. Surgical algorithms in rhinoplasty: a scoping review of the current status. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2021;45:2869–2877.
Celikoyar MM, Pérez MF, Akbaş MI, et al. Facial surface anthropometric features and measurements with an emphasis on rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2022;42:133–148.
Toriumi DM. New concepts in nasal tip contouring. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2006;8:156–185.
Ishii L, Fedok F, Marcus B, et al. Executive summary: “evidence-based performance measures for rhinoplasty: a multi-disciplinary performance measure set. Otolaryngol Neck Surg 2021;165:383–384.
Manahan MA, Fedok F, Davidson C, et al. Evidence-based performance measures for rhinoplasty: a multidisciplinary performance measure set. Plast Reconstr Surg 2021;147:222e–230e.
Weitere Informationen
Rhinoplasty consistsof specific surgical tasks performed in order and executed at specific times. Hierarchical task analysis (HTA) is an essential tool for developing performance metrics to help evaluate surgeries. The authors aimed to determine if there is a correlation with experience and time required for task completion. We developed an HTA for open structural rhinoplasty, then performed a survey to gather surgeons' self-reported time to complete tasks. Surgeons were grouped according to the number of rhinoplasty cases they have performed; those who performed <100 were considered "non-expert," and those who performed more than 100 cases were considered "expert." Statistical analysis was done. Machine learning (ML) was utilized as well to help evaluate the comparison of two groups. Responses from 25 surgeons were analyzed. The surgical steps that showed statistically significant differences between the two surgeon groups included the elevation of (septal) mucoperichondrial-mucoperiosteal flaps, cephalic trim, septoplasty closure, and rhinoplasty closure, with significantly shorter time required by the expert surgeons. According to ML model, rhinoplasty closure, injection, transcolumellar incisions, dorsal hump reduction, dorsal surgery-lateral osteotomies, assessment of lower lateral cartilage, and dorsal hump bone reduction were the steps where the 2 groups of surgeons had significantly different time frames. These tasks may be accepted as more prone to benefits from time and surgical volume. The number of cases observed had no significant effect, therefore, the benefits from time and surgical volume are most noted with hands-on practice and performing the procedure.
(Copyright © 2025 by Mutaz B. Habal, MD.)
The authors report no conflicts of interest.