To identify associations between scores on the CLEFT-Q and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Lifetime Version in patients with cleft lip and/or palate (CLP).
Design
Prospective.
Setting
Tertiary care center.
Patients, Participants
Patients ages six and older administered both the CLEFT-Q questionnaire and C-SSRS survey between 2019 and 2024.
Interventions
Multidisciplinary care coordination facilitated by the team psychologist.
Main Outcome Measure(s)
Associations among demographics, CLEFT-Q responses, and suicidality.
Results
A total of 305 patients were included, 141 females (46.2%) and 164 males (53.8%). Fifty-one (16.7%) endorsed lifetime incidence of suicidal ideation, four (1.3%) endorsed suicidal behavior, 12 (3.9%) endorsed non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), and one (0.3%) endorsed self-injurious behavior, intent unknown. Patients endorsing suicidal ideation had lower PROs in 12/13 categories on the CLEFT-Q questionnaire (p < 0.001). Those with suicidal behavior had lower PROs in three health-related quality of life categories (psychological function, p = 0.018; social function, p = 0.005; school function, p = 0.007), but no difference in other domains. A cutoff of ≤70 in the CLEFT-Q psychological function domain identified suicidal ideation with 72.9% sensitivity and 65.9% specificity and suicidal behavior with 100.0% sensitivity and 62.2% specificity.
Conclusions
Patients with cleft lip and/or palate have increased risks for psychosocial challenges that are often missed by healthcare providers. This study reveals that patient-reported outcomes are worse in those with CLP who endorsed suicidal ideation and behavior. Low PRO responses identify suicidality with moderate sensitivity and specificity. Patients with low scores should be offered safety screenings and psychosocial support, ideally by mental healthcare professionals.
BrahmbhattKKurtzBPAfzalKI, et al.Suicide risk screening in pediatric hospitals: Clinical pathways to address a global health crisis. Psychosomatics. 2019;60(1):1‐9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psym.2018.09.003
ChenHMechanicDHansellS. A longitudinal study of self-awareness and depressed mood in adolescence. J Youth Adolesc. 1998;27(6):719‐734. doi:https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022809815567
5.
DeVilleDCWhalenDBreslinFJ, et al.Prevalence and family-related factors associated with suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and self-injury in children aged 9 to 10 years. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(2):e1920956. doi:https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.20956
6.
KellyKABaloghEAKaplanSGFeldmanSR. Skin disease in children: Effects on quality of life, stigmatization, bullying, and suicide risk in pediatric acne, atopic dermatitis, and psoriasis patients. Children. 2021;8(11):1057. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/children8111057
7.
Al-NamankanyAAlhubaishiA. Effects of cleft lip and palate on children’s psychological health: A systematic review. J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2018;13(4):311‐318. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2018.04.007
8.
RomeoDJLeTMassenburgBB, et al.Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Reveals High Rates of Suicidality in 602 Patients With Cleft and Craniofacial Conditions. J Craniofac Surg. 2024. Published online June 6, 2024. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000010369
9.
RumseyNStockNM. Living with a cleft: psychological challenges, support and intervention. In: BerkowitzS, ed. Cleft lip and palate. Springer; 2013:907‐915. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30770-6_45
10.
NichollsWSelveyLAHarperCPerssonMRobinsonS. The psychosocial impact of cleft in a Western Australian cohort across 3 age groups. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J Off Publ Am Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Assoc. 2019;56(2):210‐221. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665618769660
LockhartE. The mental health needs of children and adolescents with cleft lip and/or palate. Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2003;8(1):7‐16. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1359104503008001003
13.
PopeAWSnyderHT. Psychosocial adjustment in children and adolescents with a craniofacial anomaly: Age and sex patterns. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J Off Publ Am Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Assoc. 2005;42(4):349‐354. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/04-043r.1
14.
CadoganJBennunI. Face value: An exploration of the psychological impact of orthognathic surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;49(5):376‐380. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2010.07.006
15.
ThompsonAKentG. Adjusting to disfigurement: Processes involved in dealing with being visibly different. Clin Psychol Rev. 2001;21(5):663‐682. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/s0272-7358(00)00056-8
16.
TurnerSRThomasPWNDowellTRumseyNSandyJR. Psychological outcomes amongst cleft patients and their families. Br J Plast Surg. 1997;50(1):1‐9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-1226(97)91275-3
17.
PinckstonMDaltonLFarrarSHottonMT. The psychosocial adjustment of children born with a cleft lip and/or palate: Cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2020;57(11):1280‐1290. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665620921669
CalearALChristensenHFreemanA, et al.A systematic review of psychosocial suicide prevention interventions for youth. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2016;25(5):467‐482. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-015-0783-4
20.
TsangarisEWong RiffKWYGoodacreT, et al.Establishing content validity of the CLEFT-Q: A new patient-reported outcome instrument for cleft lip/palate. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017;5(4):e1305. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000001305
21.
KlassenAFRiffKWWLongmireNM, et al.Psychometric findings and normative values for the CLEFT-Q based on 2434 children and young adult patients with cleft lip and/or palate from 12 countries. CMAJ Can Med Assoc J J Assoc Medicale Can. 2018;190(15):E455‐E462. doi:https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.170289
22.
Wong RiffKWYTsangarisEForrestCR, et al.CLEFT-Q: Detecting differences in outcomes among 2434 patients with varying cleft types. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019;144(1):78e‐88e. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000005723
23.
Wong RiffKWYTsangarisEGoodacreTEE, et al.What matters to patients with cleft lip and/or palate: An international qualitative study informing the development of the CLEFT-Q. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J Off Publ Am Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Assoc. 2018;55(3):442‐450. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665617732854
24.
DingYKuangWZhangX, et al.Reliability and validity of the CLEFT-Q in a Chinese context. Cleft Palate Craniofacial J. 2023:10556656231184966. Published online June 26, 2023. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656231184966
25.
PosnerKBrownGKStanleyB, et al.The Columbia-suicide severity rating scale: Initial validity and internal consistency findings from three multisite studies with adolescents and adults. Am J Psychiatry. 2011;168(12):1266‐1277. doi:https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.10111704
26.
PosnerKOquendoMAGouldMStanleyBDaviesM. Columbia Classification algorithm of suicide assessment (C-CASA): Classification of suicidal events in the FDA’s pediatric suicidal risk analysis of antidepressants. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(7):1035‐1043. doi:https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.2007.164.7.1035
SalineroLKCheungLVillavisanisDF, et al.How does CLEFT-Q change the way we practice? A prospective study integrating patient-reported outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2023. Published online September 1, 2023. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011036
29.
KanwarAMalikSProkopLJ, et al.The association between anxiety disorders and suicidal behaviors: A systematic review and meta-analysis: Research article: Association between anxiety and suicide. Depress Anxiety. 2013:n/a‐n/a. Published online February 2013. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/da.22074
NguyenDTWrightEPDeddingCPhamTTBundersJ. Low self-esteem and its association with anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation in vietnamese secondary school students: A cross-sectional study. Front Psychiatry. 2019;10:698. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00698
32.
StockNMCostaBWilkinson-BellKCulshawLKearneyAEdwardsW. Psychological and physical health outcomes in adults with craniosynostosis. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J Off Publ Am Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Assoc. 2023;60(3):257‐267. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656211059966
33.
YinSNjaiRBarkerLSiegelPZLiaoY. Summarizing health-related quality of life (HRQOL): Development and testing of a one-factor model. Popul Health Metr. 2016;14(1):22. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-016-0091-3
34.
PalermoTMLongACLewandowskiASDrotarDQuittnerALWalkerLS. Evidence-based assessment of health-related quality of life and functional impairment in pediatric psychology. J Pediatr Psychol. 2008;33(9):983‐996. discussion 997-998. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsn038
RibeiroJDFranklinJCFoxKR, et al.Self-injurious thoughts and behaviors as risk factors for future suicide ideation, attempts, and death: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychol Med. 2016;46(2):225‐236. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291715001804
37.
DunworthKHernandezJAChingJ, et al.Aesthetic Outcomes in Cleft Care: Exploring Patterns in Patient-Reported Outcomes Across Adolescence. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2023. Published online September 29, 2023. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011098
38.
DangBNPfaffMJJainNS, et al.Component restoration in the bilateral intermediate cleft tip rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021;148(2):243e‐247e. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000008197
39.
CrerandCESarwerDBKazakAEClarkeARumseyN. Body image and quality of life in adolescents with craniofacial conditions. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J Off Publ Am Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Assoc. 2017;54(1):2‐12. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/15-167
40.
ArdouinKHareJStockNM. Emotional well-being in adults born with cleft lip and/or palate: A whole of life survey in the United Kingdom. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2020;57(7):877‐885. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665619896681
41.
NarosABrocksAKlubaSReinertSKrimmelM. Health-related quality of life in cleft lip and/or palate patients – A cross-sectional study from preschool age until adolescence. J Cranio-Maxillofac Surg. 2018;46(10):1758‐1763. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2018.07.004
42.
PatrickDLBurkeLBGwaltneyCJ, et al.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 J Int Soc Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res. 2011;14(8):978‐988. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.013
43.
AaronsonNAlonsoJBurnamA, et al.Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehabil. 2002;11(3):193‐205. doi:https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015291021312
44.
PatrickDLBurkeLBGwaltneyCJ, et al.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 J Int Soc Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res. 2011;14(8):967‐977. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.014
45.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, U.S. Department of health and human services FDA center for biologics evaluation and research, U.S. Department of health and human services FDA center for devices and radiological health. Guidance for industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims: Draft guidance. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:79. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-79
46.
TsangarisERiffKWYWVargasF, et al.Translation and cultural adaptation of the CLEFT-Q for use in Colombia, Chile, and Spain. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017;15(1):228. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0805-7
FungCHHaysRD. Prospects and challenges in using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice. Qual Life Res. 2008;17(10):1297‐1302. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9379-5
49.
DobschaSKNewellSBElliottVJ, et al.Primary care and mental health staff perspectives on universal suicide risk screening and care coordination. Psychiatr Serv. 2023;74(3):305‐311. doi:https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.20220087
50.
GiddensJMSheehanKHSheehanDV. The Columbia-suicide severity rating scale (C-SSRS): Has the “gold standard” become a liability?Innov Clin Neurosci. 2014;11(9-10):66‐80.
51.
KlassenAFDaltonLGoodacreTEE, et al.Impact of completing CLEFT-Q scales that ask about appearance on children and young adults: An international study. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2020;57(7):840‐848. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665620902877
52.
HorowitzLMSnyderDJBoudreauxED, et al.Validation of the ask suicide-screening questions for adult medical inpatients: A brief tool for all ages. Psychosomatics. 2020;61(6):713‐722. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psym.2020.04.008
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
