Practical Guidance for Optimizing Patient Comfort During Microfocused Ultrasound with Visualization and Improving Patient Satisfaction

Abstract Background Microfocused ultrasound with visualization (MFU-V; Ultherapy®) is an effective method for correction of skin laxity through lifting and tightening skin on the face, neck, and décolleté as well as on other parts of the body such as the knees, arms, and abdomen. In addition to bein...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Aesthetic surgery journal 2020-01, Vol.40 (2), p.208-216
Hauptverfasser: Fabi, Sabrina G, Few, Julius W, Moinuddin, Shay
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 216
container_issue 2
container_start_page 208
container_title Aesthetic surgery journal
container_volume 40
creator Fabi, Sabrina G
Few, Julius W
Moinuddin, Shay
description Abstract Background Microfocused ultrasound with visualization (MFU-V; Ultherapy®) is an effective method for correction of skin laxity through lifting and tightening skin on the face, neck, and décolleté as well as on other parts of the body such as the knees, arms, and abdomen. In addition to being a noninvasive modality for tissue tightening, MFU-V has a biological effect on tissue, rejuvenating the skin through stimulation of elastogenesis and neocollagenesis. MFU-V is also commonly combined with other interventions such as fillers, neuromodulators, and absorbable suspension sutures. Objectives The aim of this study was to share the extensive experience of the authors in optimizing comfort for their MFU-V patients in order to provide guidance to the broader community surrounding optimal patient comfort with this procedure. Methods The authors discuss their approaches to patient comfort and satisfaction. Elements of each approach include patient selection, pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic comfort measures, and how prioritization of patient comfort affects both their individual patients and practices. Results The authors share their approaches for optimizing patient comfort during the procedure and provide an overview of both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic measures that can be adopted to support patient comfort and satisfaction. The similarities and differences of each approach are discussed. Conclusions In addition to diligent patient selection, the authors find that attention to patient comfort is directly related to satisfaction and appears to be a primary factor in patients’ decisions to return for additional treatments.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/asj/sjz079
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2191354160</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/asj/sjz079</oup_id><sourcerecordid>2191354160</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-266d3f36388aac06a8d00543dc53251cf66e59956550d5cac877bed4d19e9c83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LAzEQhoMoflQv_gDJRRBhNdlsspujVK0FRcEqvS0xyWrK7qbmQ7E_wN9tSlU8eZph5pl3Zl4A9jE6wYiTU-Fnp362QCVfA9uY5mVGCJqupxxxlFU5mm6BHe9nCCWaFZtgi6CK8ZIW2-DzzgkZjBQtHEWjRC81bKyDt_NgOrMw_TO8E8HoPsCh7VInwPPoluUbI51trIxeK_jQBie8jb2C7ya8wEfjo2jNIo3aHopUHndzZ9_-6t2n6Jvldtvvgo1GtF7vfccBmFxeTIZX2fXtaDw8u84koSRkOWOKNISRqhJCIiYqhRAtiJKU5BTLhjFNOaeMUqSoFLIqyyetCoW55rIiA3C0kk23vEbtQ90ZL3Xbil7b6Oscc0xogRlK6PEKTV9673RTz53phPuoMaqXttfJ9nple4IPvnXjU6fVL_rjcwIOV4CN8_-EvgAxRI7Z</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2191354160</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Practical Guidance for Optimizing Patient Comfort During Microfocused Ultrasound with Visualization and Improving Patient Satisfaction</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Fabi, Sabrina G ; Few, Julius W ; Moinuddin, Shay</creator><creatorcontrib>Fabi, Sabrina G ; Few, Julius W ; Moinuddin, Shay</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background Microfocused ultrasound with visualization (MFU-V; Ultherapy®) is an effective method for correction of skin laxity through lifting and tightening skin on the face, neck, and décolleté as well as on other parts of the body such as the knees, arms, and abdomen. In addition to being a noninvasive modality for tissue tightening, MFU-V has a biological effect on tissue, rejuvenating the skin through stimulation of elastogenesis and neocollagenesis. MFU-V is also commonly combined with other interventions such as fillers, neuromodulators, and absorbable suspension sutures. Objectives The aim of this study was to share the extensive experience of the authors in optimizing comfort for their MFU-V patients in order to provide guidance to the broader community surrounding optimal patient comfort with this procedure. Methods The authors discuss their approaches to patient comfort and satisfaction. Elements of each approach include patient selection, pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic comfort measures, and how prioritization of patient comfort affects both their individual patients and practices. Results The authors share their approaches for optimizing patient comfort during the procedure and provide an overview of both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic measures that can be adopted to support patient comfort and satisfaction. The similarities and differences of each approach are discussed. Conclusions In addition to diligent patient selection, the authors find that attention to patient comfort is directly related to satisfaction and appears to be a primary factor in patients’ decisions to return for additional treatments.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1090-820X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1527-330X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjz079</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30869754</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>US: Oxford University Press</publisher><ispartof>Aesthetic surgery journal, 2020-01, Vol.40 (2), p.208-216</ispartof><rights>2019 The Aesthetic Society. 2019</rights><rights>2019 The Aesthetic Society.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-266d3f36388aac06a8d00543dc53251cf66e59956550d5cac877bed4d19e9c83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-266d3f36388aac06a8d00543dc53251cf66e59956550d5cac877bed4d19e9c83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1578,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30869754$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fabi, Sabrina G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Few, Julius W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moinuddin, Shay</creatorcontrib><title>Practical Guidance for Optimizing Patient Comfort During Microfocused Ultrasound with Visualization and Improving Patient Satisfaction</title><title>Aesthetic surgery journal</title><addtitle>Aesthet Surg J</addtitle><description>Abstract Background Microfocused ultrasound with visualization (MFU-V; Ultherapy®) is an effective method for correction of skin laxity through lifting and tightening skin on the face, neck, and décolleté as well as on other parts of the body such as the knees, arms, and abdomen. In addition to being a noninvasive modality for tissue tightening, MFU-V has a biological effect on tissue, rejuvenating the skin through stimulation of elastogenesis and neocollagenesis. MFU-V is also commonly combined with other interventions such as fillers, neuromodulators, and absorbable suspension sutures. Objectives The aim of this study was to share the extensive experience of the authors in optimizing comfort for their MFU-V patients in order to provide guidance to the broader community surrounding optimal patient comfort with this procedure. Methods The authors discuss their approaches to patient comfort and satisfaction. Elements of each approach include patient selection, pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic comfort measures, and how prioritization of patient comfort affects both their individual patients and practices. Results The authors share their approaches for optimizing patient comfort during the procedure and provide an overview of both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic measures that can be adopted to support patient comfort and satisfaction. The similarities and differences of each approach are discussed. Conclusions In addition to diligent patient selection, the authors find that attention to patient comfort is directly related to satisfaction and appears to be a primary factor in patients’ decisions to return for additional treatments.</description><issn>1090-820X</issn><issn>1527-330X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>TOX</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1LAzEQhoMoflQv_gDJRRBhNdlsspujVK0FRcEqvS0xyWrK7qbmQ7E_wN9tSlU8eZph5pl3Zl4A9jE6wYiTU-Fnp362QCVfA9uY5mVGCJqupxxxlFU5mm6BHe9nCCWaFZtgi6CK8ZIW2-DzzgkZjBQtHEWjRC81bKyDt_NgOrMw_TO8E8HoPsCh7VInwPPoluUbI51trIxeK_jQBie8jb2C7ya8wEfjo2jNIo3aHopUHndzZ9_-6t2n6Jvldtvvgo1GtF7vfccBmFxeTIZX2fXtaDw8u84koSRkOWOKNISRqhJCIiYqhRAtiJKU5BTLhjFNOaeMUqSoFLIqyyetCoW55rIiA3C0kk23vEbtQ90ZL3Xbil7b6Oscc0xogRlK6PEKTV9673RTz53phPuoMaqXttfJ9nple4IPvnXjU6fVL_rjcwIOV4CN8_-EvgAxRI7Z</recordid><startdate>20200129</startdate><enddate>20200129</enddate><creator>Fabi, Sabrina G</creator><creator>Few, Julius W</creator><creator>Moinuddin, Shay</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>TOX</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20200129</creationdate><title>Practical Guidance for Optimizing Patient Comfort During Microfocused Ultrasound with Visualization and Improving Patient Satisfaction</title><author>Fabi, Sabrina G ; Few, Julius W ; Moinuddin, Shay</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-266d3f36388aac06a8d00543dc53251cf66e59956550d5cac877bed4d19e9c83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fabi, Sabrina G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Few, Julius W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moinuddin, Shay</creatorcontrib><collection>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Aesthetic surgery journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fabi, Sabrina G</au><au>Few, Julius W</au><au>Moinuddin, Shay</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Practical Guidance for Optimizing Patient Comfort During Microfocused Ultrasound with Visualization and Improving Patient Satisfaction</atitle><jtitle>Aesthetic surgery journal</jtitle><addtitle>Aesthet Surg J</addtitle><date>2020-01-29</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>40</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>208</spage><epage>216</epage><pages>208-216</pages><issn>1090-820X</issn><eissn>1527-330X</eissn><abstract>Abstract Background Microfocused ultrasound with visualization (MFU-V; Ultherapy®) is an effective method for correction of skin laxity through lifting and tightening skin on the face, neck, and décolleté as well as on other parts of the body such as the knees, arms, and abdomen. In addition to being a noninvasive modality for tissue tightening, MFU-V has a biological effect on tissue, rejuvenating the skin through stimulation of elastogenesis and neocollagenesis. MFU-V is also commonly combined with other interventions such as fillers, neuromodulators, and absorbable suspension sutures. Objectives The aim of this study was to share the extensive experience of the authors in optimizing comfort for their MFU-V patients in order to provide guidance to the broader community surrounding optimal patient comfort with this procedure. Methods The authors discuss their approaches to patient comfort and satisfaction. Elements of each approach include patient selection, pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic comfort measures, and how prioritization of patient comfort affects both their individual patients and practices. Results The authors share their approaches for optimizing patient comfort during the procedure and provide an overview of both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic measures that can be adopted to support patient comfort and satisfaction. The similarities and differences of each approach are discussed. Conclusions In addition to diligent patient selection, the authors find that attention to patient comfort is directly related to satisfaction and appears to be a primary factor in patients’ decisions to return for additional treatments.</abstract><cop>US</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>30869754</pmid><doi>10.1093/asj/sjz079</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1090-820X
ispartof Aesthetic surgery journal, 2020-01, Vol.40 (2), p.208-216
issn 1090-820X
1527-330X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2191354160
source Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Alma/SFX Local Collection
title Practical Guidance for Optimizing Patient Comfort During Microfocused Ultrasound with Visualization and Improving Patient Satisfaction
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T02%3A50%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Practical%20Guidance%20for%20Optimizing%20Patient%20Comfort%20During%20Microfocused%20Ultrasound%20with%20Visualization%20and%20Improving%20Patient%20Satisfaction&rft.jtitle=Aesthetic%20surgery%20journal&rft.au=Fabi,%20Sabrina%20G&rft.date=2020-01-29&rft.volume=40&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=208&rft.epage=216&rft.pages=208-216&rft.issn=1090-820X&rft.eissn=1527-330X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/asj/sjz079&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2191354160%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2191354160&rft_id=info:pmid/30869754&rft_oup_id=10.1093/asj/sjz079&rfr_iscdi=true