Search

Objective

This retrospective study aimed to establish a robust rating system for assessing post-operative outcomes in congenital aural atresia patients undergoing auricular reconstruction. The newly introduced EAR scale, a weighted grading system, not only considers anatomical landmarks but also factors such as ear alignment. In addition, the outer-ear cartilage scale and the visual analogue scale (VAS) were introduced. These scales were compared among themselves and against two established scales.

Methods

Nine raters assessed 17 eligible patients who underwent auricular reconstruction between 2001 and 2020.

Results

The study compared inter-rater agreement among scales, with the EAR scale proving the most reliable (Krippendorff's alpha coefficient, α = 0.45), outperforming existing measures. The outer-ear cartilage scale and the VAS exhibited lower inter-rater agreement, indicating inferiority in assessing aesthetic outcomes.

Conclusion

The EAR scale emerged as an effective tool for evaluating post-operative outcomes in congenital aural atresia auricular reconstruction.

Search Results

Refine search

Refine search

Actions for selected content:

1 results

Rating the aesthetic results after auricular reconstructive surgery for congenital aural atresia with microtia

Search Results

Refine search

Refine search

Actions for selected content:

Save Search

1 results

Rating the aesthetic results after auricular reconstructive surgery for congenital aural atresia with microtia