Social Perception of Facial Feminization Surgery Outcomes: Does Gender Identity Alter Gaze?

BACKGROUND: The evaluation of gender-affirming facial feminization surgery (FFS) outcomes can be highly subjective, which has resulted in a limited understanding of the social perception of favorable gender and aesthetic facial appearance following FFS. Eye-tracking technology has introduced an objective measure of viewer subconscious gaze. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to use eye-tracking technology to measure attention and perception of surgery-naive cisgender female and feminized transgender faces, based on viewer gender identity. METHODS: Thirty-two participants (18 cisgender and 14 transgender) were enrolled and shown 5 photographs each of surgery-naive cisgender female and feminized transgender faces. Gaze was captured with a Tobii Pro X2-60 eye-tracking device (Tobii, Stockholm, Sweden) and participants rated the gender and aesthetic appearance of each face on Likert-type scales. RESULTS: Total image gaze fixation time did not differ by participant gender identity (6.00 vs 6.04 seconds, P = 0.889); however, transgender participants spent more time evaluating the forehead/brow, buccal/mandibular regions, and chin (P < 0.001). Multivariate regression analysis showed significant associations between viewer gender identity, age, race, and education, and the time spent evaluating gender salient facial features. Feminized faces were rated as more masculine with poorer aesthetic appearance than surgery-naive cisgender female faces; however, there was no significant difference in the distribution of gender appearance ratings assigned to each photograph by cisgender and transgender participants. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that gender identity influences subconscious attention and gaze on female faces. Nevertheless, differences in gaze distribution did not correspond to subjective rated gender appearance for either surgery-naive cisgender female or feminized transgender faces, further illustrating the complexity of evaluating social perception of favorable FFS outcomes.

Prospective Quality-of-Life Outcomes after Facial Feminization Surgery: An International Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: No data exist on the prospective outcomes of facial feminization surgery. This study set out to determine the effects of facial feminization surgery on quality-of-life outcomes for gender-diverse patients. METHODS: A prospective, international, multicenter, cohort study with adult gender-diverse patients with gender dysphoria was undertaken. Facial feminization outcome score was calculated preoperatively and postoperatively (1-week to 1-month and >6 months). Photogrammetric cephalometries were measured at the same time points. Self-perceived preoperative masculinity and femininity were recorded. Externally rated gender appearance (scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being most feminine) and general aesthetics (scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being very good) for 10 facial feminization surgery patients were compared with those of five cisgender controls. Univariate linear regression analyses were used to predict outcomes from facial feminization surgery. RESULTS: Sixty-six consecutive patients were enrolled. Patients noted that their brows, jaws, and chins were the most masculine aspects of their faces (54.5 percent, 33.3 percent, and 30.3 percent, respectively). Median facial feminization outcome score increased from 47.2 preoperatively to 80.6 at 6 months or more postoperatively (p < 0.0001). Mean satisfaction was excellent (3.0 at both 1-month and ≥6-month follow-up; p = 0.46). Cephalometric values were significantly more feminine after surgery. Gender appearance was feminine to very feminine (1.83 ± 0.96) and general aesthetics were good (6.09 ± 2.01) but different from those of cisgender women controls (1.25 ± 0.49 and 7.63 ± 1.82, respectively; p < 0.001 for each). CONCLUSION: Facial feminization achieved improved quality of life, feminized cephalometries, feminine gender appearance, good overall aesthetics, and high satisfaction that were present at 1 month and stable at more than 6 months. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.