Setting up a cohort study in speech and language therapy: lessons from The UK Cleft Collective Speech and Language (CC-SL) study

Are NHS cleft services in England ready for delegation to integrated care systems?

Cleft care services in the UK have been nationally funded since centralisation 25 years ago and during this time have been able to demonstrate improved clinical outcomes. Integrated care systems have been introduced into legislature as part of the Health Care Act of 2022 and will be responsible for the paradigm shift of allocating funds on a regional basis for cleft care services in England from 2024. The proposed population-based funding formulas present an opportunity to improve current inequities in cleft care, including access to speech therapy and adult services. However, the regional footprint of integrated care systems does not align with that of the centralised cleft service system and represents a threat to the standardised patient-centred care that has taken two decades to build. Awareness needs to be raised so that cleft care providers can proactively adapt to this mandatory change to service funding to ensure that clinical standards are maintained and continue to improve.

Association of Perioperative Antibiotics with the Prevention of Postoperative Fistula after Cleft Palate Repair

Background

There is debate amongst surgeons regarding the use of antibiotics to prevent fistulae after palatoplasty. Prescribing should be evidence based, as antibiotic stewardship is integral to reducing antibiotic resistance. Our aim was to determine whether differing perioperative regimens affect the prevalence of postoperative fistulae.

Methods

The sample comprised participants from the Cleft Collective who had undergone palatoplasty. Participants were recruited across all 16 UK cleft centers between 2013 and 2021. The exposure was perioperative antibiotic regimen prescribed at the time of palatoplasty. The primary outcome was the presence of palatal fistula.

Results

Fistula data were available for 167 participants when exploring antibiotic regimen and for 159 when exploring antibiotic agent. There was no evidence to suggest a difference in fistula rate between those receiving antibiotics on induction only versus as an inpatient or up to 7 days postoperatively (χ2 = 4.57; P = 0.10). There was no evidence to suggest a difference in fistula rate between those who received co-amoxiclav and those who had an alternative antibiotic (χ2 = 0.16; P = 0.69). Postoperative fistulae increased with the extent of the cleft (χ2 = 20.39; P < 0.001). When adjusting for cleft type, no evidence of an association between antibiotic regimen and fistulae was found (inpatient antibiotics: OR 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-3.51; antibiotics up to 7 days postoperatively: OR 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-1.80).

Conclusions

The choice of antibiotic and dosing regimen does not influence the formation of postoperative fistulae. These results should be supported by interventional trials.

Parent/Caregiver Views of the Effectiveness of Speech-Language Pathology for Children Born With Cleft Palate Delivered via Telemedicine During COVID-19

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to describe and examine parent views of speech-language pathology (SLP) for children born with cleft palate delivered via telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom (UK).

METHOD

Parents were asked whether they found this method of delivery "very effective," "somewhat effective," or "not at all effective." Free text was then invited. There were 212 responses. Ordinal chi-square, Kruskal-Wallis, or Fisher's exact tests examined associations between parent views of effectiveness and biological variables and socioeconomic status. Free text responses were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty (66.0%) respondents reported that SLP delivered via telemedicine was "somewhat effective," 56 (26.4%) "very effective," and 16 (7.6%) "not at all effective." There was no evidence of an association between parent reported effectiveness and any of the explanatory variables. Parent-reported challenges impacting on effectiveness included technology issues and keeping their children engaged with sessions. Importantly, telemedicine was viewed as "better than nothing."

CONCLUSIONS

Most parents reported that they felt SLP delivered via telemedicine during the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK was at least "somewhat effective." It is important to interpret this in the context of there being no other method of service delivery during this time and that this study only represents families who were able to access SLP delivered via telemedicine. Further work is needed to identify which children with cleft palate might benefit from SLP delivered via telemedicine to inform postpandemic service provision.

A systematic review of early speech interventions for children with cleft palate

BACKGROUND

Children with cleft palate with or without cleft lip (CP±L) are at high risk of problems with early speech sound production, and these difficulties can persist into later childhood. Early intervention could help to reduce the number of children whose problems become persistent. However, much research in the field to date has focused on older children. There is a need to determine if providing intervention during the phase of early typical speech development leads to better outcomes.

AIMS

To review the evidence for the effectiveness of interventions targeting speech, delivered in the first 3 years of life for children with CP±L, and discuss factors such as intervention type, facilitator, dosage, outcome measures and the age of the child.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

The systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019121964). Eight bibliographic databases including CINAHL and MEDLINE were searched in August 2018. Studies were included if participants received speech and language interventions before 37 months and if they reported outcomes for speech. Two reviewers independently completed inclusion reviews, quality analysis and data extraction.

OUTCOME & RESULTS

The review included seven papers: one pilot randomized controlled trial, one controlled trial, four cohort studies and one case series report. Interventions largely took a naturalistic approach, namely focused stimulation and milieu teaching. The findings provide preliminary support for naturalistic interventions and suggest that these interventions can be delivered by parents with suitable training. Studies included in the review provided low-strength evidence with variation in both the type of intervention, the manner of delivery and in the risk of bias in the designs used.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

The papers included in this review suggest that early naturalistic interventions can have positive impacts on the speech development of children with CP±L. However, the reported methodological quality of the publications overall was weak, and the current evidence lacks clarity and specificity in terms of therapy technique, delivery and optimum age of delivery. Future research should use more robust methodological designs to determine whether early speech interventions are beneficial for children born with CP±L.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject Children with CP±L show difficulties with early speech development and often have restricted speech sound inventories. They may reach the canonical babbling stage later than children without CP±L and studies have shown that 20% of children with CP±L have speech which is considered unintelligible or barely intelligible at age 5. It has been proposed that early intervention can lessen the impact of CP±L on speech development. However, currently, the evidence for early interventions for children with CP±L is limited, with the majority of studies focusing on children aged 3 years and older. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This paper reviews the evidence for different types of early interventions for speech provided to children born with CP±L and whether these interventions are effective in supporting speech sound development. In this review, early intervention is defined as intervention provided to children in the first 3 years of life. This review describes intervention approaches and how they are delivered for this population. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? In the UK, children born with CP±L and their families are supported by National Health Service (NHS) services over a 20-year period and speech and language therapy sessions may take place over many weeks and months. If providing early intervention in the first 3 years of life is effective, there is the potential for improved speech outcomes in early childhood and a reduced burden of care on children, families and services. This review considers the evidence for early speech intervention for children with CP±L in the first 3 years of life and identifies areas for future research.

Making the case for the collection of a minimal dataset for children with speech sound disorder

BACKGROUND

NHS case note data are a potential source of practice-based evidence which could be used to investigate the effectiveness of different interventions for individuals with a range of speech, language and communication needs. Consistency in pre- and post-intervention data as well as the collection of relevant variables would need to be demonstrated as a precursor to adopting this approach in future investigations of speech and language therapy intervention.

AIMS

To explore whether routine clinical data collection for children with speech sound disorder (SSD) could be a potential source for examining the effectiveness of intervention(s).

METHODS & PROCEDURES

We examined case notes from three UK NHS services, reviewing 174 sets of case notes and 234 blocks of therapy provided for school-age children with SSD.

MAIN CONTRIBUTION

We found there was significant variation in pre- and post-intervention data and variables collected by the services. The assessment data available in the case notes across all sites were insufficient to be used to compare the effectiveness of different interventions. Specific issues included lack of consistent reporting of pre- and post-intervention data, and use of a variety of both formal and informal assessment tools.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

The case notes reviewed were from three sites and may not represent wider clinical practice, nevertheless the findings suggest the sample explored indicates the need for more consistent and contemporaneous collection of data for children with SSD to facilitate the investigation of different interventions in practice. Researchers should work with the clinical community to determine a minimal dataset that includes a core outcome set and potential variables. This should be feasible to collect in clinical practice and provide a dataset for future investigations of clinically relevant research questions. This would provide an invaluable resource to the clinical academic and research communities enabling research questions to be addressed that have the potential to lead to improved outcomes and more cost-effective services.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject While there is some evidence for the efficacy of therapy for children with SSD, studies typically focus on very specific populations who meet strict selection criteria and take place in university clinics or laboratory-style settings which do not reflect typical clinical practice in the UK and elsewhere. An alternative approach to investigating the effectiveness of interventions would be to use NHS case note data. It is not clear from the existing literature whether case note data are sufficiently robust to facilitate such an analysis. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study found that case note data, in particular assessment data, were highly variable across services and would be insufficient to compare different interventions for this population. Agreement on what should be included in a minimal dataset for children with SSD is required to maximize the potential for NHS clinical case notes to become a resource for future research. What are the actual or potential clinical implications of this work? This study indicates that current clinical practice in SLT for children with SSD is inconsistent with regards to the reporting of pre- and post-intervention assessment data and other important variables in case notes. We make the case for agreeing a minimal dataset with a need for clinicians to work with researchers to determine core outcomes and additional relevant data, which can be feasibly collected in clinical practice.

Exploring the relationship between conductive hearing loss and cleft speech characteristics in children born with cleft palate

BACKGROUND

Children with cleft palate are at high risk of both conductive hearing loss and cleft speech characteristics (CSCs) yet there is limited research to understand whether hearing loss impacts speech development in this population by contributing to the development of CSCs.

AIMS

This study used data from a large national cohort study in the UK (The Cleft Collective) to explore the relationship between those with a history of diagnosed hearing loss and presence of CSCs in children with cleft palate (+/- cleft lip) aged between 18 and 24 months.

METHOD

Speech and Language Therapists (SLTs) provided uniformed information from assessment for 123 participants who had been recruited to the Cleft Collective study. History of diagnosed hearing loss, intervention for hearing loss, and presence of CSCs were reported. A consonant inventory for each participant was completed. Statistical analysis of relationships between hearing loss and CSCs and analysis of consonant inventories was undertaken to provide information related to speech acquisition and its relationship with hearing.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant relationship between history of diagnosed hearing loss and presence of CSCs (p < 0.05). Analysis of the consonant inventories highlighted that children with diagnosed hearing loss used fewer oral consonants compared to those with normal hearing (p < 0.05) CONCLUSION: This study provides some evidence that a conductive hearing loss can affect speech in children with cleft palate resulting in CSCs developing. Therefore, children with cleft palate should be closely monitored by audiology from birth to ensure that hearing is optimised for speech and language development. SLT services should also closely monitor the speech development of those children where a hearing loss has been identified, so that early intervention can be provided if appropriate. Continued data collection, with a large sample of children, will provide additional evidence regarding how this hearing loss is best managed. It will also allow increased knowledge of the long term impact of conductive hearing loss on speech development in children with cleft palate.

Speech input processing in children born with cleft palate: A systematic literature review with narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Speech development requires intact and adequately functioning oral anatomy and cognitive 'speech processing' skills. There is evidence that speech input processing skills are associated with speech output problems in children not born with a cleft. Children born with cleft palate ± lip (CP±L) are at high risk of developing disordered speech output. Less is known about their speech input processing skills and whether they are associated with cleft-related speech sound disorder (SSD).

AIMS

(1) To collate and evaluate studies reporting evidence regarding the speech input processing skills of children born with cleft palate in comparison with data from typically developing children or other comparison groups; and (2) to identify any available evidence regarding relationships between speech input processing skills and speech output in children born with CP±L.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

Potentially relevant studies published up to November 2019 were identified from the following databases: Medline via Ovid, Embase via Ovid, Cinahl via Ebscohost, PsycInfo via Ebscohost, BNI via ProQuest, AMED via Ovid, Cochrane Library and Scopus. Inclusion criteria were: peer-reviewed articles published in scientific journals, any design, published in English, participants born with a CP±L aged up to age 18 years who completed speech input processing assessments compared with normative data and/or a control or other comparison group. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists were used to quality appraise included studies.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

Six studies were retained in the final review. There is some evidence that children born with CP±L perform less well than non-cleft controls on some speech input processing tasks and that specific input processing skills may be related to errors in the children's speech. Heterogeneity in relation to study groups and assessments used, as well as small sample sizes, limits generalization of findings.

CONCLUSION & IMPLICATIONS

There is limited evidence regarding the speech input processing skills of children born with CP±L. There are indications that children born with CP+/L may have difficulty in some aspects of speech input processing in comparison with children not born with a cleft, and that difficulties with some speech input processing tasks may be specific to errors in children's speech output. Further research is required to develop our understanding of these skills in this population and any associations with speech output.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject Few studies have been published that examine aspects of speech input processing in children born with CP±L. Theoretical models of speech processing, and published studies, propose that speech input processing skills are associated with SSD in children who were not born with a cleft. However, it is less clear whether there is any association between speech input processing and cleft-related SSD. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This review systematically collates and evaluates the published, peer-reviewed evidence regarding speech input processing skills in children born with CP±L. The collated evidence indicates that some speech input processing skills differ between children with and without CP±L. There is some evidence, from a single study, that speech input processing of specific cleft speech characteristics (CSCs) may be associated with the presence of these CSCs in the speech output of some children born with CP±L. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? While the evidence is currently limited, increasing our knowledge of speech input processing skills in children born with CP±L contributes to our clinical understanding of the nature of cleft-related SSD. The current evidence suggests that speech and language therapists should consider speech input processing skills when assessing children with cleft-related SSD to support intervention planning. Considering these skills in relation to literacy development in these children may also be important.

Cleft lip/palate and educational attainment: cause, consequence or correlation? A Mendelian randomization study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have found that children born with a non-syndromic orofacial cleft have lower-than-average educational attainment. Differences could be due to a genetic predisposition to low intelligence and academic performance, factors arising due to the cleft phenotype (such as social stigmatization, impaired speech/language development) or confounding by the prenatal environment. A clearer understanding of this mechanism will inform interventions to improve educational attainment in individuals born with a cleft, which could substantially improve their quality of life. We assessed evidence for the hypothesis that common variant genetic liability to non-syndromic cleft lip with or without cleft palate (nsCL/P) influences educational attainment.

METHODS

We performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) meta-analysis of nsCL/P with 1692 nsCL/P cases and 4259 parental and unrelated controls. Using GWAS summary statistics, we performed Linkage Disequilibrium (LD)-score regression to estimate the genetic correlation between nsCL/P, educational attainment (GWAS n = 766 345) and intelligence (GWAS n = 257 828). We used two-sample Mendelian randomization to evaluate the causal effects of genetic liability to nsCL/P on educational attainment and intelligence.

RESULTS

There was limited evidence for shared genetic aetiology or causal relationships between nsCL/P and educational attainment [genetic correlation (rg) -0.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.12 to 0.01, P 0.13; MR estimate (βMR) -0.002, 95% CI -0.009 to 0.006, P 0.679) or intelligence (rg -0.04, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.04, P 0.34; βMR -0.009, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.002, P 0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

Common variants are unlikely to predispose individuals born with nsCL/P to low educational attainment or intelligence. This is an important first step towards understanding the aetiology of low educational attainment in this group.

Cleft lip and palate: Care configuration, national registration, and research strategies

A child born with a cleft lip and palate will face 20 years or more of hospital care and surgery. This is a global problem with approximately 10 million people affected worldwide. Various models of care exist around the condition, and the best configurations of services within an economy need to be optimized. We provide examples of how centralized care can improve outcomes and provide an opportunity to establish national registries, and then emphasize the opportunities for building research platforms of relevance. The default of any cleft service should be to centralize care and enable cleft teams with a sufficient volume of patients to develop proficiency and measure the quality of outcomes. The latter needs to be benchmarked against the better centers in Europe. Two areas of concern for those with cleft are morbidity/mortality and educational attainment. These two issues are placed in context within the literature and wider approaches using population genetics. Orthodontists have always played a key role in developing these initiatives and are core members of cleft teams with major responsibilities for these children and their families.

•

Cleft lip and palate affects about 10 million people worldwide.

•

Centralised care can improve outcome and establish national registries.

•

Orthodontists have played a key role in developing these initiatives.

•

No strong evidence of an association between clefting and cancer.

•

Proper care can positively influence lives of children born with a cleft.

An Exploratory Study of Speech and Language Therapy Intervention for Children Born With Cleft Palate ± Lip

INTRODUCTION

Children born with a cleft palate ± lip are at risk of developing speech and language difficulties, which may require intervention from a speech and language therapist (SLT). To date, there is no strong evidence to support one approach to intervention over another, neither is it clear which approaches or methods of provision are commonly used.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the range of speech and language therapy interventions being used with children born with cleft palate in the United Kingdom up to 5 years of age. To explore the different ways, interventions are being delivered.

DESIGN

A prospective study to conduct 9 semi-structured focus groups. Iterative content analysis was completed.

SETTING

Regional Cleft Lip and Palate Centers in the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-two speech and language therapy professionals from specialist cleft teams and community services.

RESULTS

Four main codes were identified: "intervention approaches," "service delivery models," "decision-making and rationale," and "patient-centered care." Participants frequently discussed how they adopt an eclectic style when delivering intervention, the importance of an individualized approach for each child and service delivery constraints, such as a lack of resources.

CONCLUSION

Insight into the multitude of intervention approaches used by SLTs, aspects which influence their decision-making and the variability of service delivery models were gained. Uncertainty regarding which intervention approaches and methods for delivery are most effective provides rationale for future research, to improve the effectiveness of speech and language intervention for children with cleft palate ± lip.

Linguistic and auditory processing skills in non-syndromic children with cleft palate: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) is the most common congenital craniofacial condition. Children born with CL/P are at increased risk of persistent speech difficulties related to velopharyngeal incompetence (VPI) and compensatory articulation problems. It has also been reported that they achieve poorer results academically than their peers. There is a further body of evidence to suggest delayed language skills. These potentially related outcomes are often reported separately.

AIM

To review published and unpublished research into the nature of difficulties related to spoken and written language across all non-syndromic cleft diagnoses. To review any evidence of associations between comorbidities.

METHOD

A scoping review was carried out in October 2016 and updated in June 2019 following published methodology (Arksey & O'Malley, 2005; Levac et al. 2010).

RESULTS

A search of the literature over the two time points found 38 papers in total. Three main themes were found: oral language skills, reading and auditory processing difficulties.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence of early language delay in children born with CL/P. Evidence of persistent oral language problems is less conclusive. Many studies have reported scores within the average range for language, auditory processing and reading but poorer outcomes when compared to non-cleft control groups. However, studies have used a range of outcome measures, making comparisons difficult. Moreover there is no clear evidence how these difficulties might relate to speech outcomes or educational achievement and no comparison to other populations with speech, language and communication needs (SLCN).

Making a difference for children born with a cleft in the UK

This short review is an opportunity to focus on significant positive changes for those children born with some form of oro-facial clefting and who are treated in a centralised service within the National Health Service (NHS). There has also been an opportunity to provide a focus for research as part of this service model. Orthodontists have played a key role in all aspects of this and will continue to be central to further improvements in caring for cleft children.