Closing the Loop on Centralization of Cleft Care in the United Kingdom

Andrew R Ness; Andrew K Wills; Andrea Waylen; Jackie Smallridge; Amanda J Hall; Debbie Sell; Jonathan R Sandy

doi:10.1177/1055665617736779

Closing the Loop on Centralization of Cleft Care in the United Kingdom

Andrew R Ness, Andrew K Wills, Andrea Waylen, Jackie Smallridge, Amanda J Hall, Debbie Sell, Jonathan R Sandy

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article (Academic Journal) › peer-review

13 Citations (Scopus)

499 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We highlight a major study that investigated the impact of reconfigured cleft care in the United Kingdom some 15 years after centralization. We argue that centralization as an intervention has a major impact on outcomes.

SETTING: Audit clinics held in Cleft Centers in the United Kingdom.

PATIENTS, PARTICIPANTS: Five-year-olds born between April 1, 2005, and March 31, 2007, with nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate.

INTERVENTIONS: Centralization of cleft care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We collected routine clinical measures (speech recordings, hearing, photographs, models, oral health, psychosocial factors) in a very similar way to a previous survey.

RESULTS: We identified 359 eligible children and recruited 268 (74.7%) to the study. Overall, their outcomes were better post-centralization. There have been marked improvements in dentoalveolar arch relationships and in speech whereas the prevalence of dental caries and hearing loss are unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS: Centralized cleft care has changed UK outcomes considerably and there is no argument for returning to a dispersed model of treatment.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	248-251
Number of pages	4
Journal	Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Volume	55
Issue number	2
Early online date	14 Dec 2017
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665617736779
Publication status	Published - Feb 2018

Keywords

cleft care
unilateral cleft lip and palate outcomes
United Kingdom

Access to Document

10.1177/1055665617736779

Full-text PDF (accepted author manuscript)
This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via Sage at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1055665617736779 . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
Accepted author manuscript, 347 KB
Supplementary information PDF
This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via Sage at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1055665617736779 . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
Accepted author manuscript, 99.2 KB

Handle.net

Persistent link

NIHR BRC Nutrition
Ness, A. R. (Principal Investigator)
1/04/17 → 31/03/22
Project: Research, Parent

Cite this

@article{3930854ab6aa4dc29d83b3a9dd33d4dd,

title = "Closing the Loop on Centralization of Cleft Care in the United Kingdom",

abstract = "OBJECTIVE: We highlight a major study that investigated the impact of reconfigured cleft care in the United Kingdom some 15 years after centralization. We argue that centralization as an intervention has a major impact on outcomes.SETTING: Audit clinics held in Cleft Centers in the United Kingdom.PATIENTS, PARTICIPANTS: Five-year-olds born between April 1, 2005, and March 31, 2007, with nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate.INTERVENTIONS: Centralization of cleft care.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We collected routine clinical measures (speech recordings, hearing, photographs, models, oral health, psychosocial factors) in a very similar way to a previous survey.RESULTS: We identified 359 eligible children and recruited 268 (74.7%) to the study. Overall, their outcomes were better post-centralization. There have been marked improvements in dentoalveolar arch relationships and in speech whereas the prevalence of dental caries and hearing loss are unchanged.CONCLUSIONS: Centralized cleft care has changed UK outcomes considerably and there is no argument for returning to a dispersed model of treatment.",

keywords = "cleft care, unilateral cleft lip and palate outcomes, United Kingdom",

author = "Ness, {Andrew R} and Wills, {Andrew K} and Andrea Waylen and Jackie Smallridge and Hall, {Amanda J} and Debbie Sell and Sandy, {Jonathan R}",

year = "2018",

month = feb,

doi = "10.1177/1055665617736779",

language = "English",

volume = "55",

pages = "248--251",

journal = "Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal",

issn = "1055-6656",

publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Closing the Loop on Centralization of Cleft Care in the United Kingdom

AU - Ness, Andrew R

AU - Wills, Andrew K

AU - Waylen, Andrea

AU - Smallridge, Jackie

AU - Hall, Amanda J

AU - Sell, Debbie

AU - Sandy, Jonathan R

PY - 2018/2

Y1 - 2018/2

N2 - OBJECTIVE: We highlight a major study that investigated the impact of reconfigured cleft care in the United Kingdom some 15 years after centralization. We argue that centralization as an intervention has a major impact on outcomes.SETTING: Audit clinics held in Cleft Centers in the United Kingdom.PATIENTS, PARTICIPANTS: Five-year-olds born between April 1, 2005, and March 31, 2007, with nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate.INTERVENTIONS: Centralization of cleft care.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We collected routine clinical measures (speech recordings, hearing, photographs, models, oral health, psychosocial factors) in a very similar way to a previous survey.RESULTS: We identified 359 eligible children and recruited 268 (74.7%) to the study. Overall, their outcomes were better post-centralization. There have been marked improvements in dentoalveolar arch relationships and in speech whereas the prevalence of dental caries and hearing loss are unchanged.CONCLUSIONS: Centralized cleft care has changed UK outcomes considerably and there is no argument for returning to a dispersed model of treatment.

AB - OBJECTIVE: We highlight a major study that investigated the impact of reconfigured cleft care in the United Kingdom some 15 years after centralization. We argue that centralization as an intervention has a major impact on outcomes.SETTING: Audit clinics held in Cleft Centers in the United Kingdom.PATIENTS, PARTICIPANTS: Five-year-olds born between April 1, 2005, and March 31, 2007, with nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate.INTERVENTIONS: Centralization of cleft care.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We collected routine clinical measures (speech recordings, hearing, photographs, models, oral health, psychosocial factors) in a very similar way to a previous survey.RESULTS: We identified 359 eligible children and recruited 268 (74.7%) to the study. Overall, their outcomes were better post-centralization. There have been marked improvements in dentoalveolar arch relationships and in speech whereas the prevalence of dental caries and hearing loss are unchanged.CONCLUSIONS: Centralized cleft care has changed UK outcomes considerably and there is no argument for returning to a dispersed model of treatment.

KW - cleft care

KW - unilateral cleft lip and palate outcomes

KW - United Kingdom

U2 - 10.1177/1055665617736779

DO - 10.1177/1055665617736779

M3 - Article (Academic Journal)

C2 - 29351033

SN - 1055-6656

VL - 55

SP - 248

EP - 251

JO - Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal

JF - Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal

IS - 2

ER -

Closing the Loop on Centralization of Cleft Care in the United Kingdom

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Handle.net

Fingerprint

Projects

NIHR BRC Nutrition

Cite this