Oral Health-Related Quality of Life and Self-Rated Speech in Children With Existing Fistulas in Mid-Childhood and Adolescence.

OBJECTIVE To report the associations of oro-nasal fistulae on the patient-centered outcomes oral health-related quality of life and self-reported speech outcomes in school aged-children. DESIGN Prospective, nonrandomized multicenter design. SETTING Six ACPA-accredited cleft centers. PARTICIPANTS Patients with cleft palate at the age of mixed dentition. INTERVENTIONS None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Prevalence of fistula and location of fistula (Pittsburgh Classification System). Patients were placed into one of three groups based on the following criteria: alveolar cleft present, no previous repair (Group 1); alveolar cleft present, previously repaired (Group 2); no congenital alveolar cleft (Group 3). Presence of fistula and subgroup classification were correlated to oral health-related quality of life (Child Oral Health Impact Profile [COHIP]) and perceived speech outcomes. RESULTS The fistula rate was 5.52% (62 of 1198 patients). There was a significant difference in fistula rate between the three groups: Group 1 (11.15%), Group 2 (4.44%), Group 3 (1.90%). Patients with fistula had significantly lower COHIP scores (F1,1188 = 4.79; P = .03) and worse self-reported speech scores (F1,1197 = 4.27; P = .04). Group 1 patients with fistula had the lowest COHIP scores (F5,1188 = 4.78, P =.02) and the lowest speech scores (F5,1188 = 3.41, P = .003). CONCLUSIONS Presence of palatal fistulas was associated with lower oral health-related quality of life and perceived speech among youth with cleft. The poorest outcomes were reported among those with the highest fistula rates, including an unrepaired alveolar cleft.

[1]  R. Kirschner,et al.  65 Orthodontic Principles in the Management of Orofacial Clefts , 2016 .

[2]  H. Broder International Confederation for Cleft Lip and Palate and Related Craniofacial Anomalies Task Force Report: Holistic Outcomes , 2014, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.

[3]  M. Marazita,et al.  The Pittsburgh Fistula Classification System: A Standardized Scheme for the Description of Palatal Fistulas , 2007, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.

[4]  M. Wilson-Genderson,et al.  Reliability and convergent and discriminant validity of the Child Oral Health Impact Profile (COHIP Child's version). , 2007, Community dentistry and oral epidemiology.

[5]  H. Broder,et al.  Concurrent validity of the COHIP. , 2007, Community dentistry and oral epidemiology.

[6]  Rod J. Rohrich,et al.  Incidence of Cleft Palate Fistula: An Institutional Experience with Two‐Stage Palatal Repair , 2001, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[7]  R. Strauss,et al.  Effects of visible and invisible orofacial defects on self-perception and adjustment across developmental eras and gender. , 1994, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.

[8]  R. Strauss,et al.  Perceptions of appearance and speech by adolescent patients with cleft lip and palate and by their parents. , 1988, The Cleft palate journal.

[9]  F. Åbyholm,et al.  Palatal fistulae following cleft palate surgery. , 1979, Scandinavian journal of plastic and reconstructive surgery.