Scandcleft Project Trial 2 ‒ Comparison of speech outcome in one and two-stage palatal closure in 5-year-olds with UCLP
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Standard
Scandcleft Project Trial 2 ‒ Comparison of speech outcome in one and two-stage palatal closure in 5-year-olds with UCLP. / Lundeborg, Inger ; Nyberg, Jill; Alaluusua, Suvi ; Willadsen, Elisabeth; Persson , Christina; Lohmander, Anette.
I: Cleft Palate - Craniofacial Journal, Bind 57, Nr. 4, 2020, s. 458-469.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Scandcleft Project Trial 2 ‒ Comparison of speech outcome in one and two-stage palatal closure in 5-year-olds with UCLP
AU - Lundeborg, Inger
AU - Nyberg, Jill
AU - Alaluusua, Suvi
AU - Willadsen, Elisabeth
AU - Persson , Christina
AU - Lohmander, Anette
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - Objective:To investigate in-depth speech results in the Scandcleft Trial 2 with comparisons between surgical protocols and centers and with benchmarks from peers without cleft palate.Design:A prospective randomized clinical trial.Setting:Two Swedish and one Finnish Cleft Palate center.Participants:One hundred twelve participants were 5-years-old born with unilateral cleft lip and palate randomized to either lip repair and soft palate closure at 4 months and hard palate closure at 12 months or lip repair at 3 to 4 months (Arm A), or a closure of both the soft and hard palate at 12 months (Arm C).Main Outcome Measures:A composite measure dichotomized into velopharyngeal competency (VPC) or velopharyngeal incompetency (VPI), overall assessment of velopharyngeal function (VPC-Rate), percentage of consonants correct (PCC score), and consonant errors. In addition, number of speech therapy visits, average hearing thresholds, and secondary surgeries were documented to assess burden of treatment.Results:Across the trial, 53.5% demonstrated VPC and 46.5% VPI with no significant differences between arms or centers. In total, 27% reached age-appropriate PCC scores with no statistically significant difference between the arms. The Finnish center had significantly higher PCC scores, the Swedish centers had higher percentages of oral consonant errors. Number of speech therapy visits was significantly higher in the Finnish center.Conclusion:At age 5, poor speech outcomes with some differences between participating centers were seen but could not be attributed to surgical protocol. As one center had very few participants, the results from that center should be interpreted with caution.Keywords randomized clinical trial, primary palatal repair, velopharyngeal competence, consonant proficiency, intercenter study, crosslinguistic
AB - Objective:To investigate in-depth speech results in the Scandcleft Trial 2 with comparisons between surgical protocols and centers and with benchmarks from peers without cleft palate.Design:A prospective randomized clinical trial.Setting:Two Swedish and one Finnish Cleft Palate center.Participants:One hundred twelve participants were 5-years-old born with unilateral cleft lip and palate randomized to either lip repair and soft palate closure at 4 months and hard palate closure at 12 months or lip repair at 3 to 4 months (Arm A), or a closure of both the soft and hard palate at 12 months (Arm C).Main Outcome Measures:A composite measure dichotomized into velopharyngeal competency (VPC) or velopharyngeal incompetency (VPI), overall assessment of velopharyngeal function (VPC-Rate), percentage of consonants correct (PCC score), and consonant errors. In addition, number of speech therapy visits, average hearing thresholds, and secondary surgeries were documented to assess burden of treatment.Results:Across the trial, 53.5% demonstrated VPC and 46.5% VPI with no significant differences between arms or centers. In total, 27% reached age-appropriate PCC scores with no statistically significant difference between the arms. The Finnish center had significantly higher PCC scores, the Swedish centers had higher percentages of oral consonant errors. Number of speech therapy visits was significantly higher in the Finnish center.Conclusion:At age 5, poor speech outcomes with some differences between participating centers were seen but could not be attributed to surgical protocol. As one center had very few participants, the results from that center should be interpreted with caution.Keywords randomized clinical trial, primary palatal repair, velopharyngeal competence, consonant proficiency, intercenter study, crosslinguistic
U2 - 10.1177/1055665619888316
DO - 10.1177/1055665619888316
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 31746642
VL - 57
SP - 458
EP - 469
JO - Cleft Palate - Craniofacial Journal
JF - Cleft Palate - Craniofacial Journal
SN - 1055-6656
IS - 4
ER -
ID: 226222840