Patient satisfaction Not satisfied (n=1) Fairly satisfied (n=4) Satisfied (n=12) Very satisfied (n=3) Total (n=20) no. % no. % no. % no. % no. % Circumferential measurement               Improved 1 100 4 100 12 100 3 100 20 100 Did not improve 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0                 Photographing               No improvement 1 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 Mild improvement 0 0 4 100 5 41.67 0 0 9 45 Moderate improvement 0 0 0 0 7 58.33 2 66.67 9 45 Marked improvement 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 33.33 1 5   X2=32.222, p=.002

Table 3: Distribution of patient satisfaction among patients in both groups according to improvement by circumferential measurement and photographing. All cases included in this study (of both groups) improved by circumferential measurement yet, not all of them were equally satisfied , one case was not satisfied, four cases were fairly satisfied, twelve cases were satisfied and three cases were very satisfied. There was a significant association between the level of patient satisfaction and the degree of improvement as detected by photography, X2=32.222, p=.002.