Most Efficient and Meaningful Patient-Reported Appearance Assessment in Different Cleft Types and Age Groups with CLEFT-Q

What is the optimal assessment of speech? A multicentre, international evaluation of speech assessment in 2500 patients with a cleft

OBJECTIVES

Speech problems in patients with a cleft palate are often complex and multifactorial. Finding the optimal way of monitoring these problems is challenging. The International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) has developed a set of standardised outcome measures at specific ages for patients with a cleft lip and/or palate, including measures of speech assessment. This study evaluates the type and timing of speech outcome measures currently included in this ICHOM Standard Set. Additionally, speech assessments in other cleft protocols and initiatives are discussed.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

An international, multicentre study was set up including centres from the USA and the Netherlands. Outcomes of clinical measures and Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) were collected retrospectively according to the ICHOM set. PROM data from a field test of the CLEFT-Q, a questionnaire developed and validated for patients with a cleft, were collected, including participants from countries with all sorts of income statuses, to examine the value of additional moments of measurement that are used in other cleft initiatives.Data from 2500 patients were included. Measured outcomes contained univariate regression analyses, trend analyses, t-tests, correlations and floor and ceiling effects.

RESULTS

PROMs correlated low to moderate with clinical outcome measures. Clinical outcome measures correlated low to moderate with each other too. In contrast, two CLEFT-Q Scales correlated strongly with each other. All PROMs and the Percent Consonants Correct (PCC) showed an effect of age. In patients with an isolated cleft palate, a ceiling effect was found in the Intelligibility in Context Scale.

CONCLUSION

Recommendations for an optimal speech outcome assessment in cleft patients are made. Measurement moments of different cleft protocols and initiatives are considered in this proposition. Concerning the type of measures, adjustment of the current PCC score outcome seems appropriate. For centres with adequate resources and specific interest in research, translation and validation of an upcoming tool, the Cleft Audit Protocol for Speech Augmented, is recommended.

Using "Real-World Data" to Study Cleft Lip/Palate Care: An Exploration of Speech Outcomes from a Multi-Center US Learning Health Network

OBJECTIVE

To assess the ability of a cleft-specific multi-site learning health network registry to describe variations in cleft outcomes by cleft phenotypes, ages, and treatment centers. Observed variations were assessed for coherence with prior study findings.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis of prospectively collected data from 2019-2022.

SETTING

Six cleft treatment centers collected data systematically during routine clinic appointments according to a standardized protocol.

PARTICIPANTS

714 English-speaking children and adolescents with non-syndromic cleft lip/palate.

INTERVENTION

Routine multidisciplinary care and systematic outcomes measurement by cleft teams.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Speech outcomes included articulatory accuracy measured by Percent Consonants Correct (PCC), velopharyngeal function measured by Velopharyngeal Competence (VPC) Rating Scale (VPC-R), intelligibility measured by caregiver-reported Intelligibility in Context Scale (ICS), and two CLEFT-Q™ surveys, in which patients rate their own speech function and level of speech distress.

RESULTS

12year-olds exhibited high median PCC scores (91-100%), high frequency of velopharyngeal competency (62.50-100%), and high median Speech Function (80-91) relative to younger peers parsed by phenotype. Patients with bilateral cleft lip, alveolus, and palate reported low PCC scores (51-91%) relative to peers at some ages and low frequency of velopharyngeal competency (26.67%) at 5 years. ICS scores ranged from 3.93-5.0 for all ages and phenotypes. Speech Function and Speech Distress were similar across phenotypes.

CONCLUSIONS

This exploration of speech outcomes demonstrates the current ability of the cleft-specific registry to support cleft research efforts as a source of "real-world" data. Further work is focused on developing robust methodology for hypothesis-driven research and causal inference.