Visual Attention in Rhinoplasty: Eye-Tracking Comparison of Patients and Physicians on Profile Images
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, cilt.50, sa.7, ss.2473-2482, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 50 Sayı: 7
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.1007/s00266-025-05516-1
- Dergi Adı: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Health Research Premium Collection (ProQuest), Pharma Collection (ProQuest)
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.2473-2482
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Rhinoplasty, Eye-tracking technology, Aesthetic perception, Facial attention patterns
- Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Background: Visual attention influences aesthetic perception and may affect expectations and satisfaction in rhinoplasty. Objectives: To compare how patients and rhinoplasty surgeons visually assess facial profiles using eye-tracking technology. Methods: This cross-sectional observational study included 26 patients and 13 experienced otolaryngologists. All participants viewed 21 standardized lateral facial profile photographs. Visual attention across ten facial regions was recorded using eye-tracking technology, focusing on first fixation area, total viewing time, fixation count, and revisits. Results: Both groups focused most on the nasal region. Patients demonstrated significantly higher visual engagement with the nasal tip, including longer viewing time (25.18 ± 10.23 s vs 15.64 ± 11.19 s; P =.011) and more fixations (97.62 ± 40.64 vs 63.92 ± 42.24; P =.021). Physicians, by contrast, focused more on the radix, with longer viewing time (38.89 ± 17.49 s vs 24.91 ± 17.64 s; P =.025) and more fixations (144.38 ± 47.59 vs 108.04 ± 52.72; P =.043). No statistically significant differences were observed in other facial regions. Conclusion: Patients and surgeons focus on different nasal regions, and eye-tracking may help align their aesthetic expectations. Level of Evidence III: 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.