Consumer Awareness and Comfort with Resident-run Cosmetic Clinics: A Crowdsourcing Study.
Abstract
[BACKGROUND] Resident cosmetic clinics (RCCs) are the training modality of choice among both residents and faculty and are a mainstay at most residency programs. Despite this, knowledge of RCCs among plastic surgery consumers remains untested. We hypothesize that the public would be aware of and receptive to RCCs.
[METHODS] Participants with prior cosmetic procedures or interest in future cosmetic procedures were recruited using Amazon Mechanical Turk and asked to complete a survey in September 2020. First, prior awareness of RCCs was assessed. After a brief description of RCCs, perceptions of safety and preferences for care were assessed.
[RESULTS] After screening for quality, 815 responses were included. Forty-five percent of consumers were aware of RCCs. Seventy-six percent of consumers believed that RCCs were just as safe as attending clinics and 65% were comfortable receiving care from fourth-year residents or higher. Belief in RCC safety was associated with 4.8 times higher odds of feeling comfortable receiving care at an RCC [95% confidence interval (3.3-7.1), 0.001]. When given a hypothetical choice between residents and attendings in two scenarios, 46% of consumers chose residents for abdominoplasty and 60% chose residents for Botox injections. Belief in RCC safety was associated with choosing a resident or being indifferent in both scenarios.
[CONCLUSIONS] Consumer preference regarding RCCs has largely been untested. This study shows that belief in RCC safety influences consumers' perceived comfort with receiving care at an RCC. This knowledge can help guide RCC practice and maximize learning opportunities for surgeons-in-training.
[METHODS] Participants with prior cosmetic procedures or interest in future cosmetic procedures were recruited using Amazon Mechanical Turk and asked to complete a survey in September 2020. First, prior awareness of RCCs was assessed. After a brief description of RCCs, perceptions of safety and preferences for care were assessed.
[RESULTS] After screening for quality, 815 responses were included. Forty-five percent of consumers were aware of RCCs. Seventy-six percent of consumers believed that RCCs were just as safe as attending clinics and 65% were comfortable receiving care from fourth-year residents or higher. Belief in RCC safety was associated with 4.8 times higher odds of feeling comfortable receiving care at an RCC [95% confidence interval (3.3-7.1), 0.001]. When given a hypothetical choice between residents and attendings in two scenarios, 46% of consumers chose residents for abdominoplasty and 60% chose residents for Botox injections. Belief in RCC safety was associated with choosing a resident or being indifferent in both scenarios.
[CONCLUSIONS] Consumer preference regarding RCCs has largely been untested. This study shows that belief in RCC safety influences consumers' perceived comfort with receiving care at an RCC. This knowledge can help guide RCC practice and maximize learning opportunities for surgeons-in-training.
추출된 의학 개체 (NER)
| 유형 | 영어 표현 | 한국어 / 풀이 | UMLS CUI | 출처 | 등장 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 시술 | abdominoplasty
|
복부성형술 | dict | 1 | |
| 시술 | botox
|
보툴리눔독소 주사 | dict | 1 | |
| 약물 | [BACKGROUND] Resident
|
scispacy | 1 | ||
| 약물 | [CONCLUSIONS]
|
scispacy | 1 | ||
| 질환 | RCCs
→ Resident cosmetic clinics
|
scispacy | 1 | ||
| 질환 | RCC
|
C0007134
Renal Cell Carcinoma
|
scispacy | 1 |
🔗 함께 등장하는 도메인
이 논문이 속한 카테고리와 같은 논문에서 자주 함께 다뤄지는 카테고리들
관련 논문
- Local therapeutic strategies for neurocutaneous dysesthesia: from capsaicin to cannabinoids.
- Comparative efficacy of intralesional therapies for keloid scars: a network meta-analysis.
- Adverse neurological events following botulinum toxin type A: A case series of post-injection seizures and paralysis.
- Decreased utilization of component separation techniques over time in complex abdominal wall reconstruction following introduction of preoperative botulinum toxin A.
- Current Perspectives on Pectoralis Minor Syndrome: A Narrative Review.