Laypersons' ratings of appearance in children with and without single-suture craniosynostosis

Towards a better understanding of the social stigma of facial difference

Facial difference (FD) is not only an individual experience; it is inherently social, reflecting interactions between social norms and individual attitudes. Often FD is stigmatized. In this paper, we employ a widely used stigma framework, namely the social stigma framework put forth by Pryor and Reeder (2011), to unpack the stigma of FD. This framework posits that there are four forms of stigma: public stigma, self-stigma, stigma by association, and structural stigma. We first discuss the social and psychological literature on FD as it pertains to these various forms of stigma. We then describe coping approaches for FD stigma. Lastly, we delineate evidence-based methods for addressing the various forms of FD stigma, such that future efforts can more effectively tackle the stigma of facial difference.

Do standard surgical techniques lead to satisfying aesthetic results in nonsyndromic sagittal suture synostosis?

OBJECTIVE

Surgical correction of synostotic cranial sutures is typically performed early in an affected child's life. Depending on the severity of the cranial synostoses, different aspects of the surgical treatment may have varying degrees of importance. In this sense, the aesthetic appearance in children with normal neurological development in single-suture synostosis plays an important role in self-perception and social acceptance for both the patients themselves and their caregivers. Therefore, in this study, the authors aimed to evaluate the aesthetic outcome after surgical correction in a cohort of patients with nonsyndromic sagittal suture synostosis.

METHODS

Between December 2002 and December 2019, a total of 99 patients underwent surgical correction of a synostotic sagittal suture at the Medical University of Vienna. Depending on their age, patients underwent either an extended midline strip craniectomy (EMSC) (< 4 months) or a modified pi procedure (MPP) (≥ 4 months). After the surgical procedure, the outcome was evaluated by the treating neurosurgeon at 1- and 12-month follow-up visits, and after approximately 5 years, before the patient entered elementary school. In addition to that, the patients' caregivers were asked to evaluate the aesthetic outcome of the surgical procedure after 12 months. These results were then compared to evaluate potential differences in the perception of the surgical outcome.

RESULTS

After 12 months, the majority of the included patients were evaluated as having a good aesthetic outcome by the treating neurosurgeon (97%) and by their caregivers (89%). These differences did not show statistical significance (p = 0.11). Similarly, no differences in the aesthetic outcome depending on the surgical procedure performed could be found (p = 0.55). At the last follow-up visit, before entering elementary school, all available patients had an excellent or good surgical outcome. Moreover, the majority of caregivers (73%) reported that their child had a normal head shape appearance after surgical correction.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study have suggested that surgical correction of sagittal suture synostosis by simple operative techniques leads to a good aesthetic outcome and a normal head shape appearance in the majority of patients. An analysis of the evaluation of the surgical outcome by either the treating neurosurgeon or the patient caregivers showed comparable results and, thus, early intervention with simple surgical techniques can be recommended.

Morphological and surgical results in sagittal synostosis: early craniectomy versus later cranioplasty

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Morphological correction is one of the main aims of surgery for sagittal synostosis (SSO). Different surgical techniques have been developed; however, few studies have compared the different surgical protocols. The morphological outcome is poorly documented, because a consensual evaluation tool is lacking.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a prospective study of children operated for SSO in our institution. Children were operated whenever possible at 4 months for craniectomy; by default, children underwent cranioplasty at or after 9 months. The morphological outcome of all children was evaluated using traditional craniometry with head circumference (HC) and the cephalic index (CI), and with the Rotterdam scaphocephaly morphology score (RSMS), a total of semi-quantitative assessments of morphological hallmarks.

RESULTS

Craniectomy was significantly associated with a shorter operation time and hospital stay, and a better impact on HC and CI measurements, compared with cranioplasty. The RSMS was markedly improved after surgery in both groups; however, we found no significant difference in improvement between the two groups. Although the transfusion rate and the prevalence of developmental delay were lower in the craniectomy group, and reoperations for calvarial lacunae or complex craniosynostosis occurred only this group, these differences were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support early surgery with craniectomy whenever possible; however, cranioplasty at a later age is a very acceptable by-default indication. In addition to classical craniometry, morphological evaluation using the RSMS or a similar quantitative scale appears highly desirable for future studies.

Public Perception of a Normal Head Shape in Children With Sagittal Craniosynostosis

: A question that remains unanswered is at what level of surgical correction does the public perceive a head shape to be "normal" or "acceptable?" For most cases of non-syndromic asymptomatic craniosynostosis, the parents desire for surgical correction is to improve the cosmetic appearance of head shape. At the time of this writing, the intraoperative surgeons' perspective of what constitutes an acceptable head shape is the target for surgical correction. In introducing an improved objectively cosmetic goal, an appropriate outcome measure would be to assess what the general public considers a normal or acceptable head shape in children with craniosynostosis.

METHOD

Twenty-two unique images were presented via an online crowdsourcing survey of a severe case of non-syndromic sagittal craniosynosis gradually corrected to an age and gender matched normalized head shape. Participants were recruited via the Sick Kids Twitter account. Participants were invited to rate the head shapes as "normal" or "abnormal."

RESULTS

The 538 participants completed the online survey. Participants were able to reliably and consistently identify normal and abnormal head shapes with a Kappa Score >0.775. Furthermore, participants indicated that a correction of 70% is required in order for the cranial deformity to be regarded as "normal." This threshold closely reflects a normal Cranial Index, which is a widely used morphometric outcome in craniosynostosis.

CONCLUSION

Crowdsourcing provides an ideal method for capturing the general population's perspective on what constitutes a normal and acceptable head shape in children with sagittal craniosynostosis. Laypersons are able to reliably and consistently distinguish cranial deformities from a "normal" head shape. The public indicates a threshold correction of 70% in sagittal craniosynosis to regard it as a "normal" head shape.

Skeletal Deformity in Patients With Unilateral Coronal Craniosynostosis: Perceptions of the General Public

Study Design

A two-alternative forced choice design was used to gather perceptual data regarding unicoronal synostosis (UCS).

Objective

Cranial vault remodeling aims at improving the aesthetic appearance of infants with UCS by reshaping the forehead and reducing the potential for psychosocial discrimination. People's perception of craniofacial deformity plays a role in the stigma of deformity. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between objective skull deformity in UCS patients and laypersons' perception of skull normality.

Methods

Forty layperson skull raters were recruited from the general public. Skull raters were asked to categorize 45 infant skull images as normal or abnormal. Twenty-one of the images were UCS skulls, and 24 were normal skulls. Skulls were displayed briefly on a computer to simulate a first impression scenario and generate a perceptual response. A χ ² analysis and mixed-effects regression model were used to analyze the response data.

Results

Members of the general public were good at distinguishing between skull groups, χ ² (1) = 281.97, P < .001. In addition, skull raters' responses were predicted by the severity of deformity in the UCS skulls (b = -0.10, z = -2.6, P = .010, CI: -0.18, -0.02). A skull with a deformity value of 2.8 mm (CI: 1.8, 4.1) was equally likely to be rated normal or abnormal.

Conclusions

This is the first study to investigate the relationship between objective skull deformity in UCS and public perception. Laypersons were good at distinguishing the difference between normal and UCS skulls, and their perceptions of normality were predicted by the degree of skull deformity.

Cranial growth in isolated sagittal craniosynostosis compared with normal growth in the first 6 months of age

Sagittal craniosynostosis (SCS), the most common type of premature perinatal cranial suture fusion, results in abnormal head shape that requires extensive surgery to correct. It is important to find objective and repeatable measures of severity and surgical outcome to examine the effect of timing and technique on different SCS surgeries. The purpose of this study was to develop statistical models of infant (0-6 months old) skull growth in both normative and SCS subjects (prior to surgery). Our goal was to apply these models to the assessment of differences between these two groups in overall post-natal growth patterns and sutural growth rates as a first step to develop methods for predictive models of surgical outcome. We identified 81 patients with isolated, non-syndromic SCS from Seattle Children's Craniofacial Center patient database who had a preoperative CT exam before the age of 6 months. As a control group, we identified 117 CT exams without any craniofacial abnormalities or bone fractures in the same age group. We first created population-level templates from the CT images of the SCS and normal groups. All CT images from both groups, as well as the canonical templates of both cohorts, were annotated with anatomical landmarks, which were used in a growth model that predicted the locations of these landmarks at a given age based on each population. Using the template images and the landmark positions predicted by the growth models, we created 3D meshes for each week of age up to 6 months for both populations. To analyze the growth patterns at the suture sites, we annotated both templates with additional semi-landmarks equally spaced along the metopic, coronal, sagittal and lambdoidal cranial sutures. By transferring these semi-landmarks to meshes produced from the growth model, we measured the displacement of the bone borders and suture closure rates. We found that the growth at the metopic and coronal sutures were more rapid in the SCS cohort than in the normal cohort. The antero-posterior displacement of the semi-landmarks also indicated a more rapid growth in the sagittal plane in the SCS model than in the normal model. Statistical templates and geometric morphometrics are promising tools for understanding the growth patterns in normal and synostotic populations and to produce objective and reproducible measurements of severity and outcome. Our study is the first of its kind to quantify the bone growth for the first 6 months of life in both normal and sagittal synostosis patients.

Identification and Recent Approaches for Evaluation, Operative Counseling, and Management in Patients With Freeman-Burian Syndrome: Principles for Global Treatment

For many, the experience of a complex craniofacial malformation condition, such as Freeman-Burian syndrome (FBS), formerly Freeman-Sheldon syndrome, is deeply distressing. There are few references in the literature addressing initial evaluation and operative counseling for FBS, and guidance is absent. Two major outcomes of FBS are explored, namely diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic result, to identify factors influencing optimal clinical care in (1) diagnosis, (2) evaluation, (3) general and craniofacial operative counseling, and (4) craniofacial management.PubMed searches have yielded 15 results describing craniofacial surgery in FBS and 29 manuscripts describing psychosocial aspects of surgery and patient and family counseling and education in other non-intellectually impairing craniofacial malformation conditions. Research in this area of scholarship is plagued by problems, especially considerable knowledge gaps and an absence of study data for operative outcomes. As a result, the literature remains unsettled, though our experience presents a much more clear picture of the clinical reality for this challenging patient population. While many challenges and limitations to treatment are present, much can be done to afford these patients a good and productive quality of life through operative intervention and longitudinal psychosocial support.

Factors affecting subjective appearance evaluations among patients with congenital craniofacial conditions: An application of Cash's cognitive-behavioural model of body image development

Satisfaction with appearance is of central importance for psychological well-being and health. For individuals with an unusual appearance, such as congenital craniofacial anomalies (CFA), appearance evaluations could be especially important. However, few, if any papers have presented a comprehensive synthesis of the factors found to affect subjective satisfaction with appearance among children, adolescents, and adults born with a CFA. Further, only a handful of craniofacial studies have applied psychological theories or models to their findings, resulting in an overall lack of guidance for researchers in the field. This paper summarises the literature pertaining to satisfaction with appearance among those affected by CFAs, and examines the extent to which Cash's cognitive-behavioural model of body image development (2012) fits with this literature. Given the overlap between factors of interest in the field of CFAs, and in the area of body image more broadly, a closer collaboration between the two research fields is suggested.

Psychological adjustment to craniofacial conditions (excluding oral clefts): A review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

A congenital craniofacial anomaly (CFA) is expected to impact upon several domains of psychological, emotional and social functioning, yet no recent reviews have comprehensively summarised the available literature. Further, existing reviews tend to draw upon literature in the field of cleft lip and palate, and do not give substantive attention to other types of CFAs.

DESIGN

A review of 41 papers published between January 2000 and March 2016 pertaining to psychological adjustment to CFAs.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Findings are presented according to key psychological domains: General Psychological Well-being, Quality of Life, Behaviour, Emotional Well-being, Social Experiences, Appearance, and Treatment-Related Experiences.

RESULTS

Current literature offers a contradictory picture of adjustment to CFAs. Psychological adjustment appeared to be comparable to norms and reference groups in approximately half of the papers related to non-syndromic CFAs, while more variation was found across domains among samples with syndromic CFAs. Associations were found between adjustment, physical health and cognitive function in several papers. The review identified a number of gaps in the literature, such as the inclusion of a wide range of diagnoses within research samples.

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates the complexity of findings, both within and across domains, and highlights a number of methodological challenges.

Normative ranges of anthropometric cranial indices and metopic suture closure during infancy

OBJECTIVE Subjective evaluations typically guide craniosynostosis repair. This study provides normative values of anthropometric cranial indices that are clinically useful for the evaluation of multiple types of craniosynostosis and introduces 2 new indices that are useful in the evaluation and management of metopic and bicoronal synostosis. The authors hypothesize that normative values of the new indices as well as for established measures like the cephalic index can be drawn from the evaluation of CT scans of normal individuals. METHODS High-resolution 3D CT scans obtained in normal infants (age 0-24 months) were retrospectively reviewed. Calvarial measurements obtained from advanced imaging visualization software were used to compute cranial indices. Additionally, metopic sutures were evaluated for patency or closure. RESULTS A total of 312 participants were included in the study. Each monthly age group (total 24) included 12-18 patients, yielding 324 head CT scans studied. The mean cephalic index decreased from 0.85 at age 0-3 months to 0.81 at 19-24 months, the mean frontoparietal index decreased from 0.68 to 0.65, the metopic index from 0.59 to 0.55, and the towering index remained comparatively uniform at 0.64 and 0.65. Trends were statistically significant for all measured indices. There were no significant differences found in mean cranial indices between sexes in any age group. Metopic suture closure frequency for ages 3, 6, and 9 months were 38.5%, 69.2%, and 100.0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Radiographically acquired normative values for anthropometric cranial indices during infancy can be used as standards for guiding preoperative decision making, surgical correction, and postoperative helmeting in various forms of craniosynostosis. Metopic and towering indices represent new cranial indices that are potentially useful for the clinical evaluation of metopic and bicoronal synostoses, respectively. The present study additionally shows that metopic suture closure appears ubiquitous after 9 months of age.