The Cleft Palate Craniofacial Journal

Research has identified adults born with cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) to be at risk of poorer psychological outcomes compared to the general population. This study investigated factors that may contribute to positive and negative adjustment in adults born with CL/P.

A survey was designed and distributed by the Cleft Lip and Palate Association in collaboration with the Centre for Appearance Research CAR at the University of the West of England (UWE). There were 207 eligible responses (95% completed online) received between July and October 2018. Dependent variables included the Body Esteem Scale for Adolescents and Adults, Harter’s Self Perception Profile for Adults (Global Self-Worth, Social Competence, and Intimacy subscales), the Fear of Negative Appearance Evaluation Scale, and the Revised Adult Attachment Scale. Independent variables were the Revised Life Orientation Test, biodemographic data, and self-reported single-item questions.

Factors associated with positive adjustment included reports of a happy childhood, talking about CL/P with family, close friendships, comfort in public spaces, satisfaction with appearance, and a positive life orientation. Psychological distress was associated with a desire for further surgery to improve appearance and/or function.

Several factors were identified that may influence psychological adjustment in adults with CL/P. Throughout childhood, family-centered practice to support family cohesion and an open dialogue about CL/P is indicated, as is support for young people to develop social confidence. For adults returning to the cleft service, treatment options for appearance and/or functional concerns should be explored, with access to psychological support when indicated. Interventions to increase optimism, resilience, and self-acceptance may also be warranted throughout the life span.

To improve psychosocial risk assessment and service provision for children with craniofacial conditions presenting for annual interdisciplinary team visits.

Institute for Healthcare quality improvement model.

U.S. pediatric academic medical center.

Caregivers of children ages 0-17 years with craniofacial conditions presenting for 1692 team visits between August 2017 and July 2019.

Key drivers included: (1) standardizing pre-visit triage processes; (2) administering the Psychosocial Assessment Tool-Craniofacial Version (PAT-CV); (3) utilizing PAT-CV scores in real time to add patients to psychosocial provider schedules; and (4) family education. Interventions included improving patient screening, increasing PAT-CV completion rate, altering clinic flow, providing patient and parent education about psychosocial services, and altering team member roles to fully integrate PAT-CV administration and scoring in the clinic.

The primary outcome was the percentage of patients identified for psychosocial consultations via nurse triage, PAT-CV score, family or provider request who completed consultations. The secondary outcome was the percentage of patients completing needed psychosocial consultations based on elevated PAT-CV scores.

Use of the PAT-CV resulted in an increase in the percentage of patients with elevated psychosocial risk who received a psychosocial consultation from 86.7% to 93.4%. The percentage of children receiving psychosocial consultation at their annual team visit due to elevated PAT-CV scores increased from 72% to 90%.

Integrating a validated psychosocial risk screening instrument can improve risk identification and psychosocial consultation completion. A combination of risk screening approaches may be indicated to identify patients in need of psychosocial services.

To determine the prevalence of, reasons for, and outcomes related to Child Protective Services (CPS) referral in an isolated and syndromic cleft lip/palate population.

Retrospective cohort study.

Tertiary Children’s Hospital.

Any patient <18 years of age attending the multidisciplinary cleft team for care at our institution with a history of referral to CPS by the cleft team during the study period 2009 to 2014.

The number of children with CPS referrals, reasons for CPS referrals, outcomes of CPS referrals, associated psychosocial risk factors potentially predictive of CPS referral; demographics and cleft-related surgical history was also reviewed for each patient.

Of 1392 patients, 25 (1.8%) were identified with a history of referral to CPS. Average age at referral was 11 months; 76.0% of patients were <1 year of age. Most referrals (64.0%) were directly associated with issues related to cleft care. Identified psychosocial risk factors included financial strain, mental illness/cognitive disability, transportation issues, and inadequate social support. Nine families ultimately lost custody of their children temporarily (n = 5) or permanently (n = 4).

Cleft team family referral to CPS involves long-term patient care challenges requiring maximal medical and social support. Families are most commonly referred for issues related to medical neglect, which can lead to failure to thrive, delays in care, and ultimate removal from the home. Identifying families with known psychosocial risk factors and providing increased support may potentially help avoid referrals to CPS.

The majority of research to understand the risk factors of nonsyndromic orofacial clefts (NSOFCs) has been conducted in high-income populations. Although patients with NSOFCs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are at the highest risk of not receiving care, global health infrastructure allows innovative partnerships to explore the etiologic mechanisms of cleft and targets for prevention unique to these populations.

The International Family Study (IFS) is an ongoing case–control study with supplemental parental trio data designed to examine genetic, environmental, lifestyle, and sociodemographic risk factors for NSOFCs in 8 LMICs (through August 2020). Interview and biological samples are collected for each family. The interview includes demographics, family history of cleft, diet and water sources, maternal pregnancy history, and other lifestyle and environmental factors.

Seven of 8 countries are currently summarized (2012-2017) for a total of 2955 case and 2774 control families with 11 946 unique biological samples from Vietnam, Philippines, Honduras, Madagascar, Morocco, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Nicaragua. The phenotype distribution was 1641 (55.5%) cases with cleft lip and palate, 782 (26.5%) with cleft lip (CL), and 432 (14.6%) with cleft palate (CP).

The International Family Study is the largest case set of NSOFCs with an associated biobank in LMICs currently assembled. The biobank, family, and case–control study now include samples from 8 LMICs where local health care infrastructure cannot address the surgical burden of cleft or investigate causal mechanisms. The International Family Study can be a source of information and may collaborate with local public health institutions regarding education and interventions to potentially prevent NSOFCs.

The largest group of people living with repaired cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) are adults. Previous research has identified unmet treatment and psychosocial needs, yet few interventions exist. This article outlines 3 interventions developed by the Cleft Lip and Palate Association as part of its 3-year community-based Adult Services Programme; an Adults Conference, a series of panel discussions (“Cleft Talk”) streamed in podcast/video format, and a Leaver’s Pack of resources for adults wishing to return to cleft care.

Feedback from attendees of the Adults Conferences (2018-2019) was collected using specifically developed evaluation forms. Streaming metrics and social media interactions were extracted for Cleft Talk panel discussions (2019-2020). The Leaver’s Pack was piloted in 2020, using an online evaluation form. Specialist health professionals were invited to provide feedback or participate in a one-to-one interview regarding their perceived impact of the program.

All 3 interventions across the different modalities received support from participating adults, demonstrating potential to meet adults’ needs across the life span. Health professionals also offered support for the program, viewing the interventions as a valuable adjunct to formal medical CL/P services.

This exploratory evaluation indicates that peer- and community-led interventions, in combination with ongoing access to specialist medical care, can have a range of positive impacts for adults with CL/P. There is scope for similar initiatives to be developed internationally and for individuals with other craniofacial conditions. Not-for-profit organizations are encouraged to routinely evaluate their interventions to create a stronger evidence base for their valuable work.

(1) To confirm the reliability of a Japanese version of the Youth Quality of Life Instrument-Facial Differences Module (YQOL-FD); (2) to assess the quality of life (QoL) related to facial difference in Japanese youths with cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) using this instrument; and (3) to examine the QoL differences according to age, sex, and cleft type.

A cross-sectional study.

Japanese youths with CL/P were recruited through our hospital and asked to complete the YQOL-FD.

Sixty-nine Japanese youths (age, 11-18 years) with CL/P.

The domain scores of stigma, negative consequences, negative self-image, positive consequences, and coping in the YQOL-FD, and the reliability of such scores were evaluated.

The instrument showed an acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.74-0.92) and test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.94-0.98), except for the coping domain. The individual’s domain scores were spread out from the lowest score to the high scores among all domains, thus indicating the negative and positive impacts of living with facial differences regarding their QoL may vary among individuals with CL/P. All domain scores in the 15- to 18-year-old group were significantly higher than those in 11- to 14-year-old group; there were no significant differences according to sex or cleft type.

The instrument showed acceptable reliability, except for the coping domain. There were individual variations in QoL concerning the facial difference among Japanese youths with CL/P as measured by the YQOL-FD, suggesting the importance of individual evaluations. Perceptions were influenced by age, but not sex or cleft type.

To investigate the impact of living with a cleft lip and/or cleft palate (CL/P) on sociodemographic variables, quality of life, aesthetics, life satisfaction, and social distress in Dutch-speaking adolescents and adults.

Cross-sectional study.

Thirty Dutch-speaking participants with a CL/P with a mean age of 26.93 years (SD = 11.69) and an age- and gender-matched control group of 30 participants (19 men and 11 women) without a CL/P with a mean age of 26.87 years (SD = 11.73).

Self-reported outcomes of sociodemographics, quality of life, aesthetics, life satisfaction, social distress, and impact of cleft on well-being and functioning.

No significant differences in educational level, employment, monthly net income, marital status, and having children were found between participants with and without a CL/P. In addition, quality of life, overall aesthetics, life satisfaction, and social distress did not differ between the 2 groups. Among participants with CL/P, there were no gender differences in the influence of their CL/P on daily functioning, well-being, social contacts, family life, applying for a job, work, education, or leisure time.

The findings revealed no differences between participants with and without a CL/P with regard to sociodemographics, quality of life, aesthetics, life satisfaction, or social distress. There were no gender differences in the influence of cleft on well-being and functioning. Longitudinal research can help determine possible fluctuations in the impact of living with a CL/P across the life span.

Life can be challenging for children with a visible difference due to a medical condition, and they might be at risk for emotional and behavioral problems. This study examines emotional and behavioral problems in children with a cleft lip with or without palate (CL ± P) or an infantile hemangioma (IH) in relation to the visibility of the condition, the presence of additional condition-related problems, and parental affect.

This cross-sectional study took place in an academic medical hospital in the Erasmus MC Sophia Children’s Hospital, the Netherlands.

A total of 309 parents (mean age = 40.34, 44.00% male) of 182 children with CL ± P and 48 parents (mean age = 39.21, 37.50% male) of 33 children with an IH completed questionnaires. Children were 1.5 to 12 years old.

Parents reported fewer child emotional and behavioral problems compared to normative data. Problems reported were mainly related to learning difficulties and parent gender, while visibility of the condition had no significant influence. Parental negative affect was related to child internalizing problems. Parental positive affect was not related to any of the outcome measures.

Parents reported fewer problems for their children compared to normative data. This is inconsistent with previous research, showing similar or worse scores for these children compared to peers. Our findings may be explained by a protective parenting style, a response shift in parents, or problems developing at a later point in life.

To date, the recording of outcomes of interventions for velopharyngeal dysfunction (VPD) has not been standardized. This makes a comparison of results between studies challenging. The aim of this study was to develop a core outcome set (COS) for reporting outcomes in studies examining the management of VPD.

A two-round Delphi consensus process was used to develop the COS.

The expert Delphi panel comprised patients and caregivers of patients with VPD, surgeons and speech and language therapists specializing in cleft palate, and researchers with expertise in VPD.

A long list of outcomes was derived from the published literature. In each round of a Delphi survey, participants were asked to score outcomes using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations scale of 1 to 9, with 1 to 3 labeled “not important,” 4 to 6 labeled “important but not critical,” and 7 to 9 labeled “critical.”

Consensus criteria were specified a priori. Outcomes with a rating of 75% or more of the panel rating 7 to 9 and 25% or fewer rating 1 to 3 were included in the COS.

A total of 31 core outcomes were identified from the Delphi process. This list was condensed to combine topic areas to produce a final COS of 10 outcomes, including both processes of care and patient-reported outcomes that should be considered for reporting in future studies of VPD.

Implementation of the COS-VPD will facilitate consistency of outcomes data collection and comparison of results across studies.