Provision and Utilization of Team- and Community-Based Operative Care for Patients With Cleft Lip/Palate in North Carolina

2020 ◽  
Vol 57 (11) ◽  
pp. 1298-1307
Author(s):  
Elliot Le ◽  
Peter Shrader ◽  
Hayden Bosworth ◽  
Jillian Hurst ◽  
Benjamin Goldstein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
North Carolina ◽  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Velopharyngeal Insufficiency ◽  
Multidisciplinary Teams ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Operative Care ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Community Providers

Objective: To characterize operative care for cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) based on location (ie, from American Cleft Palate Craniofacial Association [ACPA]–approved multidisciplinary teams or from community providers). Design: Cross-sectional analysis of Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database and State Ambulatory Surgery & Services Database databases for North Carolina from 2012 to 2015. Setting/Patients and Main Outcome Measures: Clinical encounters for children with CL/P undergoing operative procedures were identified, classified by location as “Team” versus “Community,” and characterized by demographic, geographic, clinical, and procedural factors. A secondary evaluation reviewed concordance of team and community practices with an ACPA guideline related to coordination of care. Results: Three teams and 39 community providers performed a total of 3010 cleft-related procedures across 2070 encounters. Teams performed 69.7% of total volume and performed the majority of cleft procedures, including cleft lip repair, palate repair, alveolar bone grafting, and correction of velopharyngeal insufficiency. Community locations principally offered myringotomy and rhinoplasty. Team care was associated with higher guideline concordance. Conclusions: American Cleft Palate Craniofacial Association –approved team-based care accounts for the majority of cleft-related care in North Carolina; however, a substantial volume of cleft-related procedures was provided by community providers, with 3 providers accounting for the vast majority of community cases.

scholarly journals Alveolar bone heights of maxillary central incisors in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients using cone-beam computed tomography evaluation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcin Stasiak ◽  
Anna Wojtaszek-Słomińska ◽  
Bogna Racka-Pilszak
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Contralateral Side ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting

Abstract Purpose The aims of this retrospective cross-sectional study were to measure and compare labial and palatal alveolar bone heights of maxillary central incisors in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients, following STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guidelines. Patients and methods The study group consisted of 21 patients with a mean age of 16 years. High-resolution cone-beam computed tomography was performed at least one year after secondary alveolar bone grafting. The experimental side was the cleft side and the contralateral side without congenital cleft was the control. Measurements were performed on incisors’ midsagittal cross-sections. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for intergroup comparisons. Results The labial and palatal distances between alveolar bone crests and cementoenamel junctions were significantly greater on the cleft side than on the noncleft side. Mean differences were 0.75 and 1.41 mm, respectively. The prevalence of dehiscences at the cleft side maxillary central incisors was 52% on the labial surface and 43% on the palatal surface. In the controls, it was 19% and 14%, respectively. Conclusion The cleft-adjacent maxillary central incisors had more apically displaced alveolar bone crests on the labial and palatal sides of the roots than the controls. Higher prevalence of dehiscences was found on the cleft side. Bone margin differences predispose to gingival height differences of the central incisors. These differences could increase the demands of patients to obtain more esthetic treatment results with orthodontic extrusion and periodontal intervention on the cleft side.

Alveolar Bone Grafting

2019 ◽  
pp. 95-98
Author(s):  
Raj M. Vyas ◽  
Gennaya L. Mattison
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Bone Graft ◽  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Mixed Dentition ◽  
Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Cleft Lip Repair

Alveolar bone grafting plays a crucial role in cleft reconstruction. When neonatal presurgical orthodontia is successful in aligning the cleft segments, alveolar reconstruction can be initiated as a gingivoperiosteoplasty during primary cleft lip repair. In children with cleft palate, alveolar bone grafting is usually done after transverse maxillary expansion with a palatal expander. Exact timing of bone grafting is controversial; most centers initiate orthodontic evaluation/expansion between ages 7 and 8 years (beginning of mixed dentition) with an aim to bone graft before age 10 in order to allow osteogenic incorporation prior to eruption of the permanent canine teeth.

Speech Intelligibility of Patients with Cleft Lip and Palate after Placement of Speech Prosthesis

2007 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 635-641 ◽  
Author(s):  
João Henrique Nogueira Pinto ◽  
Giseleda Silva Dalben ◽  
Maria Inês Pegoraro-Krook
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Speech Therapy ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Velopharyngeal Insufficiency ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Dental Needs

Objective: To evaluate the speech intelligibility of patients with clefts before and after placement of a speech prosthesis. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Hospital for Rehabilitation of Craniofacial Anomalies, University of São Paulo (HRAC/USP), Bauru, Brazil. Patients: Twenty-seven patients with unoperated cleft palate or operated cleft palate presenting with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) after primary palatoplasty, treated with speech prosthesis, aged 8 to 63 years. Interventions: Patients were fitted with palatopharyngeal obturators or pharyngeal bulbs, suitable to their dental needs. Five speech-language pathologists blindly evaluated speech samples of the patients with and without the prosthesis. Main Outcome Measures: Classification of speech samples according to a scoring system developed for speech intelligibility problems: 1 (normal), 2 (mild), 3 (mild to moderate), 4 (moderate), 5 (moderate to severe), and 6 (severe). Results were evaluated by the calculation of means of all judges for each patient in both situations. Results: The judges presented significant agreement (W = .789, p < .01). Speech intelligibility was significantly better after placement of the prosthesis for both unoperated patients (Z = 1.93, p = .02) and operated patients with VPI after primary palatoplasty (Z = 1.78, p = .03). Conclusions: Speech intelligibility may be improved by rehabilitation of patients with cleft palate using a speech prosthesis. Speech therapy is needed to eliminate any compensatory articulation productions developed prior to prosthetic management.

Applying the ICF-CY to Specialist Speech-Language Pathologists’ Practice With Toddlers With Cleft Palate Speech

2020 ◽  
Vol 57 (9) ◽  
pp. 1105-1116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Cronin ◽  
Sharynne McLeod ◽  
Sarah Verdon
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
The United States ◽  
Velopharyngeal Insufficiency ◽  
International Classification Of Functioning ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Cleft Palate Speech ◽  
Public Clinics

Objective: To evaluate how the practice of specialist speech-language pathologists (SLPs) working with young children with cleft palate ± cleft lip (CP±L) maps onto the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health – Children and Youth version (ICF-CY) and consider the functionality of the categories of the ICF-CY for this specialist area of practice. Design: Cross-sectional, qualitative study. Setting: Semistructured face-to-face interviews were conducted with SLPs working in tertiary-level hospitals, universities, and public clinics. Participants: Six specialist SLPs with 17 to 39 years of experience working with young children with CP±L as researchers and clinicians in Australia, Brazil, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, and the United States. Main Outcome Measure(s): Specialists’ practices were captured using in-depth, semistructured interviews. Data collected were analyzed by directed content analysis applying the ICF-CY as a coding schema. Results: In total, 4077 data points were coded. Most mapped onto Body Structures (684, 16.8%), Body Functions (906, 22.2%), and Environmental Factors (1626, 39.9%) with less emphasis on Activities and Participation (560, 13.7%). A “best fit” approach was taken to topics that did not map exactly onto categories of the ICF-CY (eg, velopharyngeal insufficiency [VPI]); however, there was not always an ideally suitable category available. Conclusions: The current study revealed strengths and challenges in categorizing practice within the ICF-CY for children with CP±L, including collaboration with parents and significant others, specificity around speech, language, and articulation, and the different types of VPI. Therefore, future discussion around how best to use the framework with children with CP±L is needed.

Comparison of Facial Form in Primary Alveolar Bone-Grafted and Nongrafted Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients: Intercenter Retrospective Study

1996 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carroll-Ann Trotman ◽  
Ross E. Long ◽  
Sheldon W. Rosenstein ◽  
Carole Murphy ◽  
Lysle E. Johnston
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Craniofacial Morphology ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Treatment Protocols ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Matching Criteria

The purpose of this study was to describe and compare posttreatment craniofacial morphology in samples of complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP) patients treated at two leading clinics: The Children's Memorial Hospital Cleft Palate Clinic, Chicago, Illinois, and the Lancaster Cleft Palate Clinic, Lancaster, Pennsylvania. These centers have well-defined treatment protocols that allow the long-term effects on craniofacial form of the following treatment regimes to be contrasted: (1) Chicago—primary alveolar bone grafting, with definitive lip repair at age 4 to 6 months and hard and soft palate repair at 6 to 12 months; and (2) Lancaster—definitive triangular-flap lip repair at 3 months of age, followed by staged surgeries of the hard and soft palates, both completed by 18 months of age, but without primary alveolar bone grafting. Although the Lancaster center now performs secondary alveolar bone grafting, the majority of the patients studied here were treated before this procedure became part of their protocol. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had no other congenital anomalies and no previous orthodontic treatment. A sample of 43 (24 male, 19 female) CUCLP patients was obtained from the Chicago Center, each of which was then matched to a non-grafted Lancaster CUCLP patient. The matching criteria were age, sex, and sella-nasion distance (to control, at least in part, for size differences). Lateral cephalometric radiographs of these 86 CUCLP patients were traced, digitized, and analyzed. Additionally, all linear data were adjusted to a standard magnification of 8% because the cephalograms from each center featured different enlargements. The Chicago and Lancaster samples had mean posttreatment ages of 10.32 years (SD = 1.96) and 10.40 years (SD = 2.18), respectively. The grafted Chicago group had faces that were on average less maxillary protrusive compared with the nongrafted Lancaster sample; it appeared, however, that the mandible compensated for the maxillary position by downward and backward rotation. As a result, a similar maxillomandibular relationship was noted in both groups, although, in the Chicago group, the lower anterior facial height increased.

scholarly journals Clinical Evaluation of Surgical Orthodontic Procedure with Bone Grafts for Patients with Cleft Palate during Adolescence

2021 ◽  
pp. 750-755
Author(s):  
Ravindra Manerikar ◽  
Shilpa Pharande ◽  
N. G Toshniwal ◽  
Kishor Chougule ◽  
Abhijit Misal
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Multidisciplinary Approach ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Alar Base ◽  
Grafting Technique ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting

Background: Cleft lip and palate is a congenital anomaly, presenting in a wide variety of forms and combinations. Successful cleft lip and cleft palate rehabilitation requires a multidisciplinary approach employing the skills of different specialists. Aims & Objectives: The aim of this paper was to present orthodontic preparation of patients prior to alveolar bone grafting & to review our findings in a group of patients treated by secondary and delayed bone-grafting procedures at our institution. Methodology: Thirty eight patients were examined for the type of cleft and the age at the time of examination. 10 patients were treated in our institution with presurgical orthodontics & operated by a delayed bone-grafting technique.  Duration and type of expansion was noted at pre-operative, 2 months and 6 months. Crestal bone heights and the quality of the bone in the grafted areas was examined radiographically, along with presence of any fistulas. Results: All the patients demonstrated improved alar base and upper lip support, also better dental stability was seen in the region of cleft. Conclusion: All the patients included in this study appeared to benefit from the procedure with improved facial balance. In all ten patients the oronasal fistulas remained closed, hence was reported to be a success.

Prevalence of Reading Difficulties in 9- to 10-Year Old Children in Sweden Born With Cleft Palate

2021 ◽  
pp. 105566562110132
Author(s):  
Justin Parry Weinfeld ◽  
Jakob Åsberg Johnels ◽  
Christina Persson
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Reading Difficulties ◽  
Learning Problems ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Parental Questionnaire ◽  
Background Data ◽  
Cross Sectional Design

Objective: To investigate the prevalence of reading difficulties in children born with cleft palate at ages 9 and 10 in Sweden. Design: Using a cross-sectional design, a parental questionnaire assessing dyslexia-like reading difficulties (Short Dyslexia Scale, SDS) was administered together with separate questions regarding background data. Participants: Families with a child born with overt cleft palate with or without cleft lip in 4 regions of Sweden. A total of 245 families were approached of which 138 families responded. Data from 136 (56%) were complete with information on cleft type and could be analyzed. Results: Twenty-two percent (95% CI, 15-30) of the whole study group displayed risk for dyslexic reading difficulties on the SDS corresponding to the 7th to 10th percentiles in the population. Children with cleft palate only had a significantly higher prevalence of reading difficulties (37%) compared to children with unilateral cleft palate (19%) and bilateral cleft palate (10%). The frequency of reading difficulties in participants with comorbidity was 32%. Among a subgroup with reported comorbidity in areas of attention, language, and learning problems, there was a 2.5 times higher risk of reading disability compared to participants without this reported comorbidity. Conclusion: The prevalence of reading difficulties in the cleft palate population was higher than in the general population. Results showed that co-occurring difficulties were common in the cleft group and that reading difficulties often appear together with other, co-occurring neurodevelopmental difficulties.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document