OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the reproducibility, reliability, and predictive validity of a previously developed index by the authors for assessing surgical outcome in unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) children aged 5. METHODS: Sixty randomly selected study models of 5- to 6-year-old complete UCLP subjects were obtained and the index was used to assess their surgical outcomes. RESULTS: Assessment of these study models using the new index demonstrated excellent intra-examiner agreement. The inter-examiner agreement was shown to be good. The corresponding longitudinal models at 16 to 18 years of 54 of the initial 5- to 6-year-old sample were also acquired. These subjects had undergone orthodontic treatment but not orthognathic surgery. The need for osteotomy amongst these models was assessed. Between 13% and 18% (depending on examiner) of 5-year-olds' models were scored in the groups likely to require orthognathic surgery. In the corresponding 16- to 18-year-olds' models, 9% were assessed as likely to benefit from an osteotomy. However, on an individual basis, it was not possible to predict future growth from study models at age 5. CONCLUSIONS: This study has provided a reliable and reproducible index for assessing the outcome of surgery in UCLP subjects earlier than indices already available. True validation of the index was not possible but it appears that it relies on face validity.
OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the reproducibility, reliability, and predictive validity of a previously developed index by the authors for assessing surgical outcome in unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) children aged 5. METHODS: Sixty randomly selected study models of 5- to 6-year-old complete UCLP subjects were obtained and the index was used to assess their surgical outcomes. RESULTS: Assessment of these study models using the new index demonstrated excellent intra-examiner agreement. The inter-examiner agreement was shown to be good. The corresponding longitudinal models at 16 to 18 years of 54 of the initial 5- to 6-year-old sample were also acquired. These subjects had undergone orthodontic treatment but not orthognathic surgery. The need for osteotomy amongst these models was assessed. Between 13% and 18% (depending on examiner) of 5-year-olds' models were scored in the groups likely to require orthognathic surgery. In the corresponding 16- to 18-year-olds' models, 9% were assessed as likely to benefit from an osteotomy. However, on an individual basis, it was not possible to predict future growth from study models at age 5. CONCLUSIONS: This study has provided a reliable and reproducible index for assessing the outcome of surgery in UCLP subjects earlier than indices already available. True validation of the index was not possible but it appears that it relies on face validity.
Authors: Kristina Klintö; Agneta Karsten; Agneta Marcusson; Anna Paganini; Sara Rizell; Jenny Cajander; Karin Brunnegård; Malin Hakelius; Åsa Okhiria; Petra Peterson; Avni Abdiu; Christina Havstam; Hans Mark; Emilie Hagberg; Lena Björnström; Anna-Paulina Wiedel; Magnus Becker Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2020-06-11 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: R Al-Ghatam; T E M Jones; A J Ireland; N E Atack; O Chawla; S Deacon; L Albery; A R M Cobb; J Cadogan; S Leary; A Waylen; A K Wills; B Richard; H Bella; A R Ness; J R Sandy Journal: Orthod Craniofac Res Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Sukhraj S Grewal; Sirisha Ponduri; Sam D Leary; Yvonne Wren; John M D Thompson; Anthony J Ireland; Andy R Ness; Jonathan R Sandy Journal: Cleft Palate Craniofac J Date: 2020-09-29