APR 2019

MedEsthetics—business education for medical practitioners—provides the latest noninvasive cosmetic procedures, treatment trends, product and equipment reviews, legal issues and medical aesthetics industry news.

Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 12 of 60

BEST PR ACTICES © GETTY IMAGES 10 APRIL 2019 | Med Esthetics Practices that can respond to changing consumer demographics and behaviors tend to experience increased loyalty and higher rates of new patient acquisitions. To help you stay ahead of the curve, Wendy Lewis of Global Aesthetics Consultancy shares four trends driving consumer demand that aes- thetic practices can incorporate now: 1. Namaste Health. Think in terms of holistic wellness. Incorporate fresh and natural ingredients, such as botanicals and essential oils that benefi t body and mind, into treatments. Offer guests fresh juice and add new offerings to your menu like yoga classes or mindfulness workshops to reengage with existing clients and attract new ones. 2. Prejuvenation is the New Rejuvenation. Target a younger clientele with treatments and services that boast preventative aging benefi ts. Millennials and Gen Xers are eager to maintain their physical youth in a way that's minimally invasive and fast. Think mini oxygen-infusing facials, lunchtime lasers, microdermabrasion and effective homecare products. 3. Education That Makes the Grade. Support and promote your medical aesthetic offerings by host- ing VIP parties, open houses and community events. Maximize the opportunity by highlighting—and offering—at-home devices and products that promote maintenance between professional treatments. 4. Encourage Clients to Invest in Themselves. Offer your patients an easy way to invest in themselves by providing patient fi nancing services, such as CareCredit. Revolving lines of credit can be used again and again for new and repeat treatments and also can be used for other healthcare, beauty and wellness needs for patients and their family members. New Trends for Practice Growth A 1,470nm diode laser with intralesional fi ber device helped resolve recurrent, infl amed keloid scars by decreasing infl ammation and stabilizing collagen. Ke Li, MD, et al, enrolled 19 patients (mean age 35.21 years) with a history of infl amed keloids with episodes of infec- tion or abscesses in their study. Subjects, who were evaluated before and one year following treatment, underwent treatment with the 1,470nm diode laser for an average of 1.16 treatments. Parameters for evaluation included infection frequency, pain (by visual analogue scale); itch; quality of life (QOL), using QOL scale; and blood supply. One year following treatment, infection frequency and blood supply in keloids were reduced; pain, itching, and QOL were all improved. The study was published in Burns & Trauma (February 15, 2019). 1,470NM DIODE LASER FOR KELOID SCARRING LONGEVITY OF BARBED SUTURE INSERTION LIFTS Minimally invasive facelifts performed with absorbable barbed sutures have longevity of less than one year, according to a recent study by Dario Bertossi, MD, et al, published February 15, 2019 in Aesthetic Surgery Journal. The authors retrospectively evaluated the outcomes of 160 consecutive patients who underwent facelifts with barbed polydioxanone (PDO) threads. There were two methods used: For malar augmentation and correction of nasolabial grooves, two or three 23-gauge PDO threads were placed per side; for treatment of mandibular lines, two to four 21-gauge PDO threads were inserted per side. Based on their review, the researchers found that all patients experienced improvement in facial tissue ptosis immediately after suture placement and for one month postoperatively. This improvement declined noticeably by six months and was absent by one year. The overall complication rate in the early postoperative period was 34 percent (55 of 160 patients). Complications included superfi cial displacement of the barbed sutures (11.2 percent, 18 patients), transient erythema (9.4 percent, 15 patients), infection (6.2 percent, 10 patients), skin dimpling (6.2 percent, 10 patients) and temporary facial stiffness (1.2 percent, 2 patients). The authors concluded, "Given this transient benefi t and the complication rate of 34 percent, we recommend limiting this procedure to patients with contraindications for more invasive facial surgery."

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Medesthetics - APR 2019