• Caroline A Banks, Nate Jowett, and Tessa A Hadlock.
• Facial Nerve Center, Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary and Harvard Medical School, Boston.
• JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2017 May 1; 19 (3): 206-211.

ImportanceUse of a robust high-resolution instrument for grading of facial symmetry would enhance reporting the outcomes of facial reanimation interventions. The eFACE is one such tool.ObjectiveTo determine test-retest reliability of the eFACE tool over time and agreement between eFACE assessments made in person vs those made using video of facial mimetic function.Design, Setting, And ParticipantsA prospective observational study was conducted among 75 consecutive patients with varying degrees of facial palsy who presented between July 1 and December 31, 2014, to an academic tertiary referral hospital. Facial symmetry of all patients was graded in person and via standardized photographic and video documentation of facial mimetic function at the initial visit. Three months after initial presentation, eFACE scores were reassessed by the same raters using the videos of facial mimetic function documented at the initial visit.Main Outcomes And MeasuresIndividual and subset eFACE scores assessed by 2 facial reanimation surgeons.ResultsAmong the 75 patients in the study (mean [SD] age, 48.18 [16.60] years; 30 men and 45 women), agreement between in-person and video assessments of facial function using the eFACE scale was excellent (static subset score: mean difference, 0.19; 95% CI, -1.51 to 1.88; P = .83; intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.89; dynamic subset score: mean difference, -0.51; 95% CI, -1.72 to 0.71; P = .41; ICC, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94 to 0.97; synkinesis subset score: mean difference, -1.14; 95% CI, -2.87 to 0.59; P = .20; ICC, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.93; and composite score: mean difference, -0.41; 95% CI, -1.30 to 0.47; P = .36; ICC, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92 to 0.96). Agreement between repeated eFACE assessments of video of facial function was excellent (static subset score: ICC, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87 to 0.96; dynamic subset score: ICC, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.94; synkinesis subset score: ICC, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.96; and composite score: ICC, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93 to 0.98).Conclusions And RelevanceStrong agreement exists between eFACE scores of facial function assessed in person and from video recordings. Test-retest reliability of eFACE scores is high. The eFACE is a reliable instrument for high-resolution assessment of facial mimetic function.Level Of EvidenceNA.

12 keywords...

hide…