Evaluation of Discipline-Specific Outcomes Through a Multidisciplinary Team Clinic for Patients With Isolated Cleft Palate

"The Decision to End Speech Therapy Brought More Peace and Tranquility Into Our Family": Exploring Speech-Related Treatment Fatigue and Dropout in Parents and Children With a Cleft Palate

PURPOSE

Treatment fatigue is a complex, multidimensional, multicausal, and subjective phenomenon that is not yet well explored and understood in the area of speech therapy. The purpose of this study was to investigate speech-related treatment fatigue and speech treatment dropout in parents and children with a cleft (lip and) palate receiving or having received speech treatment for cleft-related articulation disorders.

METHOD

Thirteen participants were included in this study (n = seven parents with a median age of 40 years and n = six children with a median age of 10 years). Qualitative semistructured interviews were conducted separately with parents and children to investigate their experiences with cleft speech treatment. An inductive thematic approach was used to analyze the data and construct different themes. Rigor of the data was verified by conducting an investigator triangulation and by performing member checks.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The analyses of the interviews yielded three major themes of importance to the children and their parents: (a) physical symptoms of treatment fatigue, (b) psychological symptoms of treatment fatigue, and (c) from treatment fatigue to treatment dropout. Physical symptoms of treatment fatigue were mainly related to transportation burden. On a psychological level, speech treatment may potentially lead to a cognitive-emotional overload. These feelings are primarily related to the practical issue of scheduling required treatment sessions in the family agenda. The decision to discontinue speech treatment was reported to be multifactorial. In this decision-making process, data suggested that the child's perspective must be heard more.

A Geospatial Analysis of Barriers to Cleft Lip and Palate Care in the United States

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluates the geospatial distribution of cleft lip and/or cleft palate (CL/P) care in the United States, assesses disparities between families with and without one-hour proximity to CL/P care, and recommends interventions for improving access.

DESIGN

We identified American Cleft Palate Craniofacial Association-approved CL/P teams and calculated a one-hour driving radius around each clinic. We then used census data to compare risk factors for developing cleft (i.e., incidence risk factors) and obstacles to care (i.e., access risk factors) between counties with and without one-hour proximity.

RESULTS

We identified 187 CL/P teams in 45 states. Most were in the South (n = 60, 32.0%), though children in the Middle Atlantic had the greatest access to care. Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Kentucky had the least access. Children without access were 39% more likely to have gestational tobacco exposure, 8% more likely to have gestational obesity exposure, and 28% less likely to have health insurance (p < 0.01). Children without access in the South were 29% more likely to have a low birth weight and 46% more likely to be living below the poverty line (p < 0.01). Children with access were twice as likely to live in immigrant families and 7-times more likely to speak English as a second language.

CONCLUSIONS

Pronounced disparities affect patients with and without one-hour access to CL/P care. Interventions should address care costs for patients living furthest without access and language barriers for patients with access that speak English as a second language.

Multidisciplinary Optimal Outcomes Reporting and Team Clinic Retention in Isolated Nonsyndromic Cleft Palate

OBJECTIVE

Optimal Outcomes Reporting was recently introduced to categorize outcomes after cleft palate repair. We seek to propose an expanded version of Optimal Outcomes Reporting and to determine if correlation exists between the expanded outcomes and persistence with team care follow-up through age 9.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Cleft team at large pediatric hospital.

PATIENTS

Patients with isolated nonsyndromic cleft palate (n = 83) born from 2001-2012.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients who continued to present at age 5 or greater were assessed for optimal outcomes. Optimal outcomes were: surgery - no fistula or velopharyngeal insufficiency; otolaryngology - no obstructive sleep apnea or signs of chronic middle ear disease; audiology - no hearing loss; speech-language pathology - no assessed need for speech therapy.

RESULTS

Of the 83 patients identified, 41 were assessed for optimal outcomes. Optimal outcome in any discipline was not associated with follow-up through age 9 (0.112 ≤ p ≤ 0.999). For all disciplines, the group with suboptimal outcomes had a higher proportion of patients from geographic areas in the most disadvantaged quartile of social vulnerability index, with the strongest association in the group with suboptimal speech outcome (OR 6.75, 95% CI 0.841-81.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal outcomes and retention in team clinic were not statistically significantly associated, but clinically relevant associations were found between patients in the most disadvantaged quartile of social vulnerability and their outcomes. A patient-centered approach, including caregiver education about long-term care for patients with cleft palate, would allow for enhanced resource utilization to improve retention for patients of concern.

Continuous Multidisciplinary Care for Patients With Orofacial Clefts-Should the Follow-up Interval Depend on the Cleft Entity?

Objective

The multidisciplinary follow-up of patients with cleft lip with or without palate (CL/P) is organized differently in specialized centers worldwide. The aim of this study was to evaluate the different treatment needs of patients with different manifestations of CL/P and to potentially adapt the frequency and timing of checkup examinations accordingly.

Design

We retrospectively analyzed the data of all patients attending the CL/P consultation hour at a tertiary care center between June 2005 and August 2020 (n = 1126). We defined 3 groups of cleft entities: (1) isolated clefts of lip or lip and alveolus (CL/A), (2) isolated clefts of the hard and/or soft palate, and (3) complete clefts of lip, alveolus and palate (CLP). Timing and type of therapy recommendations given by the specialists of different disciplines were analyzed for statistical differences.

Results

Patients with CLP made up the largest group (n = 537), followed by patients with cleft of the soft palate (n = 371) and CL ± A (n = 218). There were significant differences between the groups with regard to type and frequency of treatment recommendations. A therapy was recommended in a high proportion of examinations in all groups at all ages.

Conclusion

Although there are differences between cleft entities, the treatment need of patients with orofacial clefts is generally high during the growth period. Patients with CL/A showed a similarly high treatment demand and should be monitored closely. A close follow-up for patients with diagnosis of CL/P is crucial and measures should be taken to increase participation in follow-up appointments.