This study explores the experiences of adolescents and young adults with craniofacial microsomia, including the impact of growing up with this craniofacial condition on daily life and sense of self. The results may guide future research on optimally supporting individuals with craniofacial microsomia during this critical life phase.
Design and Setting:
Participants were recruited through a craniofacial center, online patient support groups, and social media sites. Eleven individual semistructured interviews with participants between 12 and 22 years old were conducted by a single interviewer, transcribed, iteratively coded, and thematically analyzed.
Results:
Five themes were evident in the data: (1) impact on personal growth and character development, (2) negative psychosocial impact, (3) deciding to hide or reveal the condition, (4) desire to make personal surgical decisions, and (5) struggles with hearing loss.
Conclusions:
We identified both medical and psychosocial concerns prevalent among adolescents with craniofacial microsomia. Although adolescents with craniofacial microsomia exhibit considerable resilience, the challenges they face impact their sense of self and should be addressed through psychosocial support and counseling. Further research should investigate the potential benefit of the wider use of hearing aids, as well as the involvement of patients in decision-making about reconstructive ear surgery.
BarryMJEdgman-LevitanS. Shared decision making—the pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(9):780–781.
2.
BeauneLForrestCRKeithT. Adolescents’ perspectives on living and growing up with treacher collins syndrome: a qualitative study. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2004;41(4):343–350.
3.
BemmelsHBieseckerBSchmidtJLKrokoskyAGuidottiRSuttonEJ. Psychological and social factors in undergoing reconstructive surgery among individuals with craniofacial conditions: an exploratory study. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2013;50(2):158–167.
CloonanYKKifleYDavisSSpeltzMLWerlerMMStarrJR. Sleep outcomes in children with hemifacial microsomia and controls: a follow-up study. Pediatrics. 2009;124(2):e313–e321.
6.
CollettBRSpeltzMLCloonanYKLerouxBGKellyJPWerlerMM. Neurodevelopmental outcomes in children with hemifacial microsomia. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2011;165(2):134–140.
7.
ConstantineKKGilmoreJLeeKLeachJJr. Comparison of microtia reconstruction outcomes using rib cartilage vs porous polyethylene implant. JAMA Facial Plastic Surg. 2014;16(4):240–244.
8.
CrerandCESarwerDBKazakAEClarkeARumseyN. Body image and quality of life in adolescents with craniofacial conditions. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2017;54(1):2–12.
9.
CreswellJW. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2012.
10.
CrosnoeR. Fitting In, Standing Out: Navigating the Social Challenges of High School to Get an Education. New York, NY: Cambridge university press; 2011.
11.
DavisonTEMcCabeMP. Adolescent body image and psychosocial functioning. J Soc Psychol. 2006;146(1):15–30.
12.
Dedoose Version 8.0.35, web application for managing, analyzing, and presenting qualitative and mixed method research data. 2018. Los Angeles, CA: SocioCultural Research Consultants, LLC. www.dedoose.com.
13.
DuftonLMSpeltzMLKellyJPLerouxBCollettBRWerlerMM. Psychosocial outcomes in children with hemifacial microsomia. J Pediatr Psychol. 2011;36:794–805.
14.
EdwardsTCPatrickDLTopolskiTDAspinallCLMouradianWESpeltzML. Approaches to craniofacial-specific quality of life assessment in adolescents. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2005;42(1):19–24.
15.
GriffithsCWilliamsonHRumseyN. The romantic experiences of adolescents with a visible difference: exploring concerns, protective factors and support needs. J Health Psychol. 2012;17(7):1053–1064.
16.
HeikeCLLuquettiDVHingAV. Craniofacial Microsomia Overview. 2009. In: AdamMPArdingerHHPagonRA. (Eds.), GeneReviews® [Internet]. Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993–2018. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK5199/. Updated October 9, 2014.
17.
HruschkaDJSchwartzDSt. JohnDCPicone-DecaroEJenkinRCareyJW. Reliability in coding open-ended data: lessons learned from hiv behavioral research. Field Methods. 2004;16(1):307–331.
18.
KhetaniMACollettBRSpeltzMLWerlerMM. Health-related quality of life in children with hemifacial microsomia: parent and child perspectives. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2013;34(9):661–668.
19.
LefebvreAMunroI. The role of psychiatry in a craniofacial team. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1978;61(4):564–569.
20.
LieuJETye-MurrayNFuQ. Study of children with unilateral hearing loss. Laryngoscope. 2012;122(9):2088–2095.
21.
LieuJETye-MurrayNKarzonRKPiccirilloJF. Unilateral hearing loss is associated with worse speech-language scores in children. Pediatrics. 2010;125(6):e1348–e1355.
22.
MacgregorFC. Facial disfigurement: problems and management of social interaction and implications for mental health. Aesthetic plastic Surg. 1990;14(4):249–257.
23.
MarisCLEndrigaMCOmnellMLSpeltzML. Psychosocial adjustment in twin pairs with and without hemifacial microsomia. Cleft palate craniofac J. 1999;36(1):43–50.
24.
MitchellRMSaltzmanBSNortonSJHarrisonRGHeikeCLLuquettiDVSieKC. Hearing loss in children with craniofacial microsomia. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2017;54(6):656–663.
25.
MoellerMP. Current state of knowledge: psychosocial development in children with hearing impairment. Ear Hear. 2007;28(6):729–739.
26.
PadwaBLEvansCAPillemerFC. Psychosocial adjustment in children with hemifacial microsomia and other craniofacial deformities. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1991;28(4):354–359.
27.
PaulhusDL. Measurement and control of response in bias. Measures of social psychological attitudes. 1991;1:17–59.
28.
PerinelliEGremigniP. Use of social desirability scales in clinical psychology: a systematic review. J Clin Psychol. 2016;72(6):534–551.
29.
PopeAWWardJ. Self-perceived facial appearance and psychosocial adjustment in preadolescents with craniofacial anomalies. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1997;34(5):396–401.
30.
PruzinskyT. Social and psychological effects of major craniofacial deformity. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1992;29(6):578–584.
31.
RuggeriAGummerumMHanochY. Braving difficult choices alone: children’s and adolescents’ medical decision making. PLoS One. 2014;9(8):e103287.
32.
RumseyNClarkeAWhitePWyn-WillimasMGarlickW. Altered body image: appearance-related concerns of people with visible disfigurement. J Adv Nurs. 2004;48(5):443–453.
33.
ShapiroDNWaljeeJRanganathanKBuchmanSWarschauskyS. Gender and satisfaction with appearance in children with craniofacial anomalies. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;136(6):789–795.
34.
SnyderHPopeAW. Psychosocial adjustment in children and adolescents with a craniofacial anomaly: diagnosis-specific patterns. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2010;47(7):264–272.
35.
StangJStoryM. Guidelines for adolescent nutrition services. Minneapolis: center for leadership, education and training in maternal and child nutrition, division of epidemiology and community health, school of public health, university of Minnesota. 2005.
36.
TharpeAM. Unilateral and mild bilateral hearing loss in children: past and current perspectives. Trends Amplif. 2008;12(1):7–15.
37.
TiemensKNicholasDForrestCR. Living with difference: experiences of adolescent girls with cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2013;50(2):e27–e34.
38.
TurnerSRThomasPWDowellTRumseyNSandryJR. Psychological outcomes amongst cleft patients and their families. Br J Plast Surg. 1997;50(1):1–9.
