Home Cleft-Lip-Palate-Service-Delivery-Format |
|
|
|
|
|
Cleft Lip and Palate
Service Delivery
Format
(e.g., individual, group)

External Scientific Evidence
|
Evidence-Based Practice Guidelines |
Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists; Department of Health (UK); National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE)
Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists Clinical Guidelines: 5.5 Cleft Palate & Velopharyngeal Abnormalities
Taylor-Goh, S., ed. (2005).
RCSLT Clinical Guidelines. Bicester, Speechmark Publishing Ltd. |
Description
This guideline provides recommendations for the assessment and treatment of cleft palate and velopharyngeal abnormalities. The target audience for this guideline is speech-language pathologists. Recommendations are based on randomized controlled trials (Level A Evidence), well-conducted clinical studies (Level B Evidence), or expert opinion (Level C Evidence).
Recommendations
Intensive individual and group treatment has been shown to be effective (Level A Evidence).
|
Evidence-Based Systematic Reviews |
|
No evidence-based systematic reviews were found. |
Clinical Expertise/Expert Opinion
| Consensus Guidelines |
|
No consensus guidelines were found. |
Client/Patient/Caregiver Perspectives
|
Interdisciplinary Craniofacial Teams Compared with Individual Providers: Is Orofacial Cleft Care More Comprehensive and Do Parents Perceive Better Outcomes?
Austin, A. A., Druschel, C. M., et al. (2010).
Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 47(1), 1-8. |
Description
This study examined the perceived satisfaction of care for 253 mothers of children with orofacial clefts. Differences in outcomes based on type of care (interdisciplinary versus individual) was reported.
Conclusions
-
Differences in service delivery (team care versus individual care) did not appear to affect maternal perception of the child's speech.
-
No differences were noted for speech therapy based on service delivery. However, those who did not receive team care were more likely to indicate unmet speech therapy needs. A "marginal difference (p = .06) was found for speech therapy" (p. 3) between groups; 18% of children without team care reported unmet speech therapy needs compared to 9% of those who received team care.
- Children who did not receive team care were less likely to receive hearing testing; "however, only four mothers, all in the team care group, reported an unmet need for hearing tests" (p. 5).
Cleft Lip and Palate Treatment of 530 Children Over a Decade in a Single Centre
Vlastos, I. M., Koudoumnakis, E., et al. (2009).
International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 73(7), 993-7. |
Description
This is a retrospective study of 530 children who received multidisciplinary treatment for cleft lip and palate. Satisfaction with multidisciplinary care, which included speech and audiology services, was reported.
Conclusions
Seventy percent of the respondents reported very good or excellent results 2-5 years after surgery and multidisciplinary care. However, parents of children with bilateral clefts were significantly less satisfied post treatment.
Type of Oral Cleft and Mothers' Perceptions of Care, Health Status, and Outcomes for Preadolescent Children
Damiano, P. C., Tyler, M. C., et al. (2006).
Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 43(6), 715-21. |
Description
This study examined factors that affect health-related quality of life of children with cleft lip, cleft palate or cleft lip and palate. Mothers of children with different types of clefts completed a survey addressing quality of life and factors of care.
Conclusions
Use the image below to navigate to other sections of the Cleft Lip and Palate evidence map.

|
|
|
|
|
|
|