Home  About us  Contact
 

Facial Deformities (facial + deformity)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Medical Sciences100%

Selected Abstracts

Measuring attentional bias to peripheral facial deformities

THE LARYNGOSCOPE, Issue 3 2009
Lisa Ishii MD
Abstract Objectives: Introduce a novel method for objectively evaluating attentional bias to peripheral facial deformities using an established metric of attention. Methods: The SMI eye-tracker system (SensoMotoric Inc., Boston, MA) was used to record the eye movement patterns, called scanpaths, of eight naďve observers gazing at pictures of faces with or without peripheral surgical deformities. The scanpaths of observers gazing on those novel faces were compared, and the fixation durations for different facial regions were compared between faces. Results: There were statistically significant differences in the mean fixation times between the faces considered normal and those considered abnormal (those with an obvious defect). When multivariate analysis of variance was performed with dependent variables total fixation time, fixation time in central triangle, and fixation time in the defect region and the independent variable face, all four tests were highly statistically significant. When univariate analysis of variance was performed to test the hypothesis that defect fixation times varied by face, the results were highly statistically significant (F = 8.79, P = .0003). Conclusions: Observers gazing on faces typically focus their attention on discriminating features, such as eyes, nose, and mouth. The well-established method of eye movement recordings was applied in a novel way to provide quantitative data showing changes in observer gaze patterns to focus on deformities. These gaze patterns are a direct reflection of observer attention. This is the first objective method to quantify the amount of distraction caused by peripheral facial deformities and may provide insight into the perception of facial deformity. Laryngoscope, 119:459,465, 2009 [source]

World War I: the genesis of craniomaxillofacial surgery?

ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY, Issue 1-2 2004
Donald A. Simpson
Herbert Moran enlisted in the Royal Army Medical Corps early in World War I. His autobiography captures the impact of contemporary experience of wartime gunshot wounds, seen in vast numbers and with little understanding of the requirements of wartime surgery. Wounds of the face and brain were numerous, especially in trench fighting. In France, Germany, Britain and elsewhere, surgeons and dentists collaborated to repair mutilated faces and special centres were set up to facilitate this. The innovative New Zealand surgeon Harold Gillies developed his famous reconstructive techniques in the Queen's Hospital at Sidcup, with the help of dental surgeons, anaesthetists and medical artists. The treatment of brain wounds was controversial. Many surgeons, especially on the German side, advocated minimal primary operative surgery and delayed closure. Others advocated early exploration and immediate closure; among the first to do so was the Austro-Hungarian otologist Robert Bárány. In 1918, the pioneer American neurosurgeon Harvey Cushing published well-documented proof of the desirability of definitive operative management done as soon as possible. Few World War I surgeons developed their knowledge of plastic surgery, neurosurgery and oral surgery in post-war practice. An exception was Henry Newland, who went on to pioneer the development of these specialties in Australasia. After World War II, the French plastic surgeon Paul Tessier created the multidisciplinary subspecialty of craniomaxillofacial surgery, with the help of his neurosurgical colleague Gérard Guiot, and applied this approach to the correction of facial deformities. It has become evident that the new subspecialty requires appropriate training programs. [source]

Measuring attentional bias to peripheral facial deformities

THE LARYNGOSCOPE, Issue 3 2009
Lisa Ishii MD
Abstract Objectives: Introduce a novel method for objectively evaluating attentional bias to peripheral facial deformities using an established metric of attention. Methods: The SMI eye-tracker system (SensoMotoric Inc., Boston, MA) was used to record the eye movement patterns, called scanpaths, of eight naďve observers gazing at pictures of faces with or without peripheral surgical deformities. The scanpaths of observers gazing on those novel faces were compared, and the fixation durations for different facial regions were compared between faces. Results: There were statistically significant differences in the mean fixation times between the faces considered normal and those considered abnormal (those with an obvious defect). When multivariate analysis of variance was performed with dependent variables total fixation time, fixation time in central triangle, and fixation time in the defect region and the independent variable face, all four tests were highly statistically significant. When univariate analysis of variance was performed to test the hypothesis that defect fixation times varied by face, the results were highly statistically significant (F = 8.79, P = .0003). Conclusions: Observers gazing on faces typically focus their attention on discriminating features, such as eyes, nose, and mouth. The well-established method of eye movement recordings was applied in a novel way to provide quantitative data showing changes in observer gaze patterns to focus on deformities. These gaze patterns are a direct reflection of observer attention. This is the first objective method to quantify the amount of distraction caused by peripheral facial deformities and may provide insight into the perception of facial deformity. Laryngoscope, 119:459,465, 2009 [source]