Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Objective:

The goal of treatment for individuals with cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) is to improve physical, psychological, and social health. Outcomes of treatment are rarely measured from the patient’s perspective. The aim of the study was to develop a conceptual framework for a patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument for individuals with clefts (CLEFT-Q) by developing an in-depth understanding of issues that individuals consider to be important.

Design:

The qualitative methodology of interpretive description was used. Setting, Participants, and Intervention: We performed 136 individual in-depth interviews with participants with clefts of any age, presenting for cleft care, across 6 countries. Parents were involved if the child was more comfortable. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and coded using constant comparison. The data were used to develop a refined conceptual framework.

Results:

Participants described concepts of interest in 3 top-level domains, each of which included subdomains: appearance (face, nose, nostrils, teeth, lips, jaw, cleft lip scar), health-related quality of life (psychological, social, school, speech-related distress), and facial function (speech, eating/drinking). Participants were able to describe changes over time with regard to the 3 domains.

Conclusions:

A conceptual framework of concepts of interest to individuals with CL/P formed the basis of the scales in the CLEFT-Q. Each subdomain represents an independently functioning scale. Understanding what matters to patients is essential in guiding PRO measurement.

Keywords

cleft lip and/or palate interpretive description qualitative patient-reported outcomes

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aaronson

Alonso

Burnam

Lohr

Patrick

Perrin

Stein

. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res. 2002;11:193–205.

Alansari

Bedos

Allison

. Living with cleft lip and palate: the treatment journey. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2014;51:222–229.

Broder

Wilson-Genderson

Sischo

. Oral health-related quality of life in youth receiving cleft-related surgery: self-report and proxy ratings. Qual Life Res. 2017;26:859–867.

Cohen

Crabtree

. Evaluative criteria for qualitative research in health care: controversies and recommendations. Ann Fam Med. 2008;6:331–339.

Eckstein

Akinbiyi

Silver

Taub

. Measuring quality of life in cleft lip and palate patients: currently available patient-reported outcomes measures. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:518e–526e.

Endriga

Kapp-Simon

. Psychological issues in craniofacial care: state of the art. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1999;36:3–11.

Feragen

Stock

. A longitudinal study of 340 young people with or without a visible difference: the impact of teasing on self-perceptions of appearance and depressive symptoms. Body Image. 2016;16:133–142.

Hall

Gibson

James

Rodd

. Children’s and adolescent’s perspectives on cleft lip and/or palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2013;50:e18–e26.

Heliövaara

Küseler

Skaare

Shaw

Molsted

Karsten

Brinck

Rizell

Marcusson

Saele

, et al. SCANDCLEFT randomized trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 6. Dental arch relationships at 5 years. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2016;25:1–6.

10.

Hunt

Burden

Hepper

Johnston

. The psychosocial effects of cleft lip and palate: a systematic review. Eur J Orthod. 2005;27:274–285.

11.

Klassen

Tsangaris

Forrest

Wong

Pusic

Cano

Syed

Dua

Kainth

Johnson

, et al. Quality of life of children treated for cleft lip and/or palate: a systematic review. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2012;65:547–557.

12.

Long

Jr Hathaway

Daskalogiannakis

Mercado

Russell

Cohen

Semb

Shaw

. The Americleft Study: an inter-center study of treatment outcomes for patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate part 1. Principles and study design. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2011;48:239–243.

13.

Patrick

Burke

Gwaltney

Leidy

Martin

Molsen

Ring

. Content validity—establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force report: part 1—eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. Value Health. 2011a;14:967–977.

14.

Patrick

Burke

Gwaltney

Leidy

Martin

Molsen

Ring

. Content validity—establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force report: part 2—assessing respondent understanding. Value Health. 2011b;14:978–988.

15.

Pope

Ziebland

Mays

. Qualitative research in health care. Analysing qualitative data. BMJ. 2000; 320:114–116.

16.

Porter

. What is value in health care? N Engl J Med. 2010; 363:2477–2481.

17.

Ranganathan

Shapiro

Aliu

Vercler

Baker

Kasten

Warschausky

Buchman

Waljee

. Health-related quality of life and the desire for revision surgery among children with cleft lip and palate. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27:1689–1693.

18.

Sandelowski

. Theoretical saturation. In: Given

, ed. The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Methods. Vol. 1. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2008:875–876.

19.

Semb

Brattström

Mølsted

Prahl-Andersen

Shaw

. The Eurocleft study: intercenter study of treatment outcome in patients with complete cleft lip and palate. Part 1: introduction and treatment experience. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2005;42:64–68.

20.

Sharif

Callery

Tierney

. The perspectives of children and young people living with cleft lip and palate: a review of qualitative literature. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2013;50:297–304.

21.

Stock

Feragen

. Psychological adjustment to cleft lip and/or palate: a narrative review of the literature. Psychol Health. 2016;31:777–813.

22.

Stock

Feragen

Rumsey

. Adults’ narratives of growing up with a cleft lip and/or palate: factors associated with psychological adjustment. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016;53:222–239.

23.

Thompson

Kent

. Adjusting to disfigurement: processes involved in dealing with being visibly different. Clin Psychol Rev. 2001;21:663–682.

24.

Thomas

Turner

Rumsey

Dowell

Sandy

. Satisfaction with facial appearance among subjects affected by a cleft. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1997; 34:226–231.

25.

Thorne

Kirkham

MacDonald-Emes

. Interpretive description: a noncategorical qualitative alternative for developing nursing knowledge. Res Nurs Health. 1997;20:169–177.

26.

Thorne

. Interpretive Description. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press; 2008.

27.

Turner

Thomas

Dowell

Rumsey

Sandy

. Psychological outcomes amongst cleft patients and their families. Br J Plast Surg. 1997;50:1–9.

28.

US Food and Drug Administration Guidance for Industry. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. Rockville, MD: Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research; 2009.

29.

Valderas

Alonso

Guyatt

. Measuring patient-reported outcomes: moving from clinical trials into clinical practice. Med J Aust. 2008;189:93–94.

30.

Welford

Murphy

Casey

. Demystifying nursing research terminology. Part 1. Nurse Res. 2011;18:38–43.

31.

Wong Riff

Tsangaris

Goodacre

Forrest

Pusic

Cano

Klassen

. International multiphase mixed methods study protocol to develop a cross-cultural patient-reported outcome instrument for children and young adults with cleft lip and/or palate (CLEFT-Q). BMJ Open. 2017;7:e015467.

What Matters to Patients With Cleft Lip and/or Palate

Abstract

Objective:

Design:

Results:

Conclusions:

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References