Rhinoplasty Difficulty Scale: Development and Psychometric Analysis of a Surgeon’s Assessment of Rhinoplasty Technique and Nasal Deformity Correction

BACKGROUND: Rhinoplasty surgeons lack a universal scale of the relative difficulty of rhinoplasty techniques and rhinoplasty deformities. OBJECTIVE: To compare the expert opinion of the difficulty of rhinoplasty techniques and rhinoplasty deformities among international rhinoplasty surgeons, as measured by a scale of difficulty. METHODS: = 64) were rated from 1-10, representing the least to most technically demanding. Rasch analysis was used to examine the fit of the observed data to Rasch model requirements, assess rating scale functioning, and provide estimates of internal consistency. RESULTS: = 63) were in practice (<5 years, 14%; 5-10, 20%; 10-20, 20%; 20-30, 26%; >30, 20%), and rhinoplasty volume ranged from <25 (14%) to >100 cases/year (32%). Self-reported expertise was comfortably novice (32%), intermediate (10%), advanced (28%), and expert (30%). Otolaryngology (42%), facial plastic surgery (30%), and plastic surgery (28%) were represented. Rasch estimates of internal consistency reliability were excellent (0.96 for surgeons and 0.99 for items); the item difficulties were more heterogeneous (mean: 0, SD: 1.23) than the distribution of surgeons (mean: -0.09, SD: 0.58). Survey items were ordered by difficulty, ranging from least difficult (inferior turbinate reduction = 1.01) to most difficult (contracted nose repair post-infection = 8.24). CONCLUSION: The newly developed Rhinoplasty Difficulty Scale provides ratings of common rhinoplasty techniques and deformities with a high correlation among experts using this rating scale.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine
Published
2026-07-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/26893614261464778
Primary Topic
Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Rhinoplasty Difficulty Scale: Development and Psychometric Analysis of a Surgeon’s Assessment of Rhinoplasty Technique and Nasal Deformity Correction

Miguel Gonçalves Ferreira, Travis T. Tollefson, Dean M. Toriumi, Everett V. Smith
Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine
Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
article

Rhinoplasty Difficulty Scale: Development and Psychometric Analysis of a Surgeon’s Assessment of Rhinoplasty Technique and Nasal Deformity Correction

Miguel Gonçalves Ferreira, Travis T. Tollefson, Dean M. Toriumi, Everett V. Smith
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Rhinoplasty surgeons lack a universal scale of the relative difficulty of rhinoplasty techniques and rhinoplasty deformities. OBJECTIVE: To compare the expert opinion of the difficulty of rhinoplasty techniques and rhinoplasty deformities among international rhinoplasty surgeons, as measured by a scale of difficulty. METHODS: = 64) were rated from 1-10, representing the least to most technically demanding. Rasch analysis was used to examine the fit of the observed data to Rasch model requirements, assess rating scale functioning, and provide estimates of internal consistency. RESULTS: = 63) were in practice (<5 years, 14%; 5-10, 20%; 10-20, 20%; 20-30, 26%; >30, 20%), and rhinoplasty volume ranged from <25 (14%) to >100 cases/year (32%). Self-reported expertise was comfortably novice (32%), intermediate (10%), advanced (28%), and expert (30%). Otolaryngology (42%), facial plastic surgery (30%), and plastic surgery (28%) were represented. Rasch estimates of internal consistency reliability were excellent (0.96 for surgeons and 0.99 for items); the item difficulties were more heterogeneous (mean: 0, SD: 1.23) than the distribution of surgeons (mean: -0.09, SD: 0.58). Survey items were ordered by difficulty, ranging from least difficult (inferior turbinate reduction = 1.01) to most difficult (contracted nose repair post-infection = 8.24). CONCLUSION: The newly developed Rhinoplasty Difficulty Scale provides ratings of common rhinoplasty techniques and deformities with a high correlation among experts using this rating scale.

Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine
Rush University Medical Center (US), Hospital de Santo António (PT), Tellabs (United States) (US), University of California, Davis (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.