Ecuadorian Spanish translation and validation of the VELO quality of life instrument

Velopharyngeal Inadequacy-Related Quality of Life Assessment: The Instrument Development and Application Review

Objective

For the patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures related to patients with velopharyngeal inadequacy (VPI), different quality of life (QOL) instruments have been developed. The present systematic review was designated to identify current VPI-related QOL instrument development, validation, and applicability.

Methods

Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, and EBSCO databases were searched in January 2022. “Velopharyngeal” or “palatopharyngeal” and “quality of life” or “life quality” were searched in title, abstract, and keywords. This study followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Two investigators independently reviewed abstracts and full texts of the identified literature. An established checklist was used to evaluate the measurement properties of each identified instrument.

Results

A total of 375 articles and 13 instruments were identified, which can be divided into nine types of families according to their development procedures. Developmental and measurement characteristics, evidence of conceptual model, content validity, reliability, construct validity, scoring, interpretation, respondent burden, and presentation for all instruments were shown.

Conclusion

The patient's self-report assessment and parent-proxy assessment are both valuable. The conclusion that any QOL instrument is absolutely the best for patients with velopharyngeal inadequacy could not be drawn. Understanding the development and characteristics of different QOL instruments, including their reliability, validity, aim, target, language, and resource, should be important before application in clinic or research.

Quality Assurance Standards for Outreach Cleft Lip and Cleft Palate Repair Programs in Low-Resource Settings

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive cleft care is a multidisciplinary team endeavor. While untreated craniofacial conditions have multiple undue repercussions, cleft care in outreach settings can be fraught with significant perioperative morbidity risks.

AIM

Propose updated quality assurance standards addressing logistic and operational considerations essential for the delivery of safe and effective cleft lip and /or palate (CL/P) care in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) settings.

METHODS

Based on American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association (ACPA) quality standards, published literature, published protocols by Global Smile Foundation (GSF), and the senior author's three-decade experience, updated standards for outreach cleft care were synthesized.

RESULTS

Ten axes for safe, effective, and sustainable cleft lip and palate care delivery in underserved settings were generated: 1) site assessment, 2) establishment of community partnerships, 3) team composition and credentialing, 4) team training and mission preparation, 5) implementation of quality assurance guidelines, operative safety checklists, and emergency response protocols, 6) immediate and long-term postoperative care, 7) medical record keeping, 8) outcomes evaluation, 9) education, and 10) capacity building and sustainability. Subsequent analysis further characterized essential components of each of those ten axes to delineate experience derived and evidence-based recommendations.

DISCUSSION

Quality assurance guidelines are essential for the safe delivery of comprehensive cleft care to patients with CL/P in any setting. Properly designed surgical outreach programs relying on honest community partnerships can be effectively used as vehicles for local capacity building and the establishment of sustainable cleft care ecosystems.