To develop a core outcome set for the audit of cleft care in Malaysia.
Design
To generate a core outcome set for patients dealing with cleft lip and/or palate within Malaysia, a combination of scholarly research reviews and consensus-driven methodologies, such as questionnaires and collaborative discussions, were utilized to guide the development process.
Setting
Multicenter study. Feedback obtains via face-to-face and online interaction.
Participants
Cleft Clinicians, Cleft Lip and Palate Association of Malaysia members, hospitals, and government bodies personal.
Main Outcome Measure
Participants provide their feedback and suggestions of each outcome measure.
Results
Through a deliberative process, agreement was established on a uniform set of outcome measures selected from an initial list of 108 potential outcomes. These agreed-upon measures were classified into 12 primary domains: demographic, cleft detail, pregnancy, general pediatric, otolaryngology/audiology, speech, surgical, orthodontics, pediatric dentistry, radiology, photographs, and study models.
Conclusion
A specialized core outcome set has been successfully developed for patients with cleft lip and/or palate, aiming to facilitate its implementation within the Malaysian healthcare system.
Organization WH. Global Registry and Database on Craniofacial Anomalies: Report of a WHO Registry Meeting on Craniofacial Anomalies; 2002.
2.
McWilliamsDThorntonMHottonMSwanMCMarie StockN. “It’s on your shoulders now” transitioning from child-to-adult UK cleft lip/palate services: An exploration of young adults’ narratives. Cleft Palate Craniofacial J. Published online 2024. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656241236006
3.
BerkowitzS. Cleft Lip and Palate: Diagnosis and Management. Springer-Verlag; 2013, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-30770-6.
4.
WeidlerEMBrittoMTSitzmanTJ. Facilitators and barriers to implementing standardized outcome measurement for children with cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2020;58(1):7‐18. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665620940187
5.
AponIRogers-VizenaCRKoudstaalMJAlloriACPetersonPVersnelSLRamirezJP. Barriers and facilitators to the international implementation of standardized outcome measures in clinical cleft practice. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2022;59(1):5‐13. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665621997668
6.
SandyJDaviesAHumphriesKIrelandTWrenY. Cleft lip and palate: care configuration, national registration, and research strategies. J World Fed Orthod. 2020;9(3):S40‐S44. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejwf.2020.09.003
7.
AlloriACKelleyTMearaJGAlbertABonanthayaKChapmanKCunninghamMDaskalogiannakisJDe GierHHeggieAA, et al.A standard set of outcome measures for the comprehensive appraisal of cleft care. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2017;54(5):540‐554. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/15-292
8.
Ali ShahSYAbdul RahmanZAMiraniSAShaikhMIKhattakMNSahitoMA. Demographic data on the characterization of oral clefts in Malaysia. Pakistan Oral Dent J. 2015;35(1):108‐110. http://podj.com.pk/archive/March_2015/PODJ-27.pdf.
9.
IbrahimHMYusoffFHMAhmadKVan DortS.An exploratory study on speech and hearing outcomes in children with cleft lip and palate. Med J Malaysia. 2015;70(6):321‐325.
10.
ShahrulAIAhmadbMSMustaphaNMRahmanANAA. A Malaysian national cleft registry: an orthodontic point of view. Arch Orofac Sci. 2020;15(2):89‐95. doi:https://doi.org/10.21315/AOS2020.15.2.462
LongREHathawayRDaskalogiannakisJMercadoARussellKCohenMSembGShawW. 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(3):239‐243. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/09-180.1
13.
StockNMHumphriesKSt. PourcainBBaileyMPerssonMHoKMRingSMarshCAlberyLRumseyN,et al.Opportunities and challenges in establishing a cohort study: an example from cleft lip/palate research in the United Kingdom. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016;53(3):317‐325. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/14-306
PegelowMKlintöKStålhandGLembergerMVesterbackaMRizellSChalienMNBjörnströmLBeckerMLindbergM, et al.Validation of reported dentoalveolar relationships in the Swedish quality registry for cleft lip and palate. Eur J Orthod. Published online 2020;42(1):30‐35. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/EJO/CJZ069
16.
American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association. CORE CURRICULUM for cleft palate & other craniofacial anomalies. 2007;(919).
17.
SantaguidaPDolovichLOliverDLamarcheLGilsingAGriffithLERichardsonJManginDKastnerMRainaP. Protocol for a Delphi consensus exercise to identify a core set of criteria for selecting health related outcome measures (HROM) to be used in primary health care. BMC Fam Pract. 2018;19(1):152. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/S12875-018-0831-5
18.
OgbeifunEAgwa-EjonJMbohwaCPretoriusJHC. The Delphi technique: a credible research methodology. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management. Vol 8-10; 2016:2004‐2009.
19.
HussinIHalimASIbrahimMIMarkosZOEffendieESAB. Cultural beliefs on the causes of cleft lip and/or palate in Malaysia: a multicenter study. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2022;59(2):209‐215. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656211003797
20.
BakarAAzmanNJaffarSHarunSSMokhtarNA. Demographics and clinical profile of orofacial cleft in International Islamic University Malaysia from. Arch Orofac Sci. 2020;15(2):97‐107. doi:https://doi.org/10.21315/aos2020.15.2.421
HammondMStassenL. Do you care? A national register for cleft lip and palate patients. Br J Orthod. 1999;26(2):152‐157. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/26.2.152
23.
KriensO. LAHSHAL: a concise documentation system for cleft lip, alveolus, and palate diagnoses. What is a Cleft Lip Palate? A Multidiscip Updat ed Kriens O, Ed (New York, NY Thieme Med Publ. Published online 1989:30–34.
MonlleóILFontesMÍBRibeiroEMde SouzaJLealGFFélixTMFett-ConteACBuenoBHMagnaLAMosseyPA, et al.Implementing the Brazilian database on orofacial clefts. Plast Surg Int. 2013;2013:1‐10. doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/641570
Hakim ZadaFAhmad AzahariAHSWongSWAliAIsmailNAS. Understanding challenges of genetic testing on neuromuscular disorders from the parental lens. J Pers Med. 2023;13(12):1652. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm13121652
29.
MoYWLeeDL. Data analysis of recent cleft lip and palate surgery in Korea using the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2021;74(2):387‐395. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2020.08.087
30.
DuddingTMartinSPopatS. An introduction to the UK care pathway for children born with a cleft of the lip and/or palate. Br Dent J. 2023;234(12):943‐946. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-023-5998-z
31.
JohnASellDSweeneyTHarding-BellAWilliamsA. The cleft audit protocol for speech—augmented: a validated and reliable measure for auditing cleft speech. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2006;43(3):272‐288. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/04-141.1
32.
LohmanderALundeborgIPerssonC. SVANTE–The Swedish articulation and nasality test–normative data and a minimum standard set for cross-linguistic comparison. Clin Linguist Phon. 2017;31(2):137‐154. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2016.1205666
33.
HenningssonGKuehnDPSellDSweeneyTTrost-CardamoneJEWhitehillTL. Universal parameters for reporting speech outcomes in individuals with cleft palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2008;45(1):1‐17. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/06-086.1
Guiñez CoelhoMA. ICDAS and dmft/DMFT. Sensitivity and specificity, the importance of the index used: a systematic review. J Dent Public Health. 2020;11(2):176‐187. doi:https://doi.org/10.17267/2596-3368dentistry.v11i2.3122
36.
SmallridgeJHallAJChorbachiRParfectVPerssonMIrelandAJWillsAKNessARSandyJR. Functional outcomes in the cleft care UK study - part 3: Oral health and audiology. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2015;18:25‐35. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12110
37.
Bastos LagesEMMarcosBPordeusIA. Oral health of individuals with cleft lip, cleft palate, or both. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2004;41(1):59‐63. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/02-058
38.
DaleCLTSmorthitKStoreyMSrinivasanV. The importance of the basic periodontal examination for paediatric orthodontic patients. Br Dent J. 2021;231(3):163‐168. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-3292-5
DoberschützPHSchwahnCKreyKF. Cephalometric analyses for cleft patients: a statistical approach to compare the variables of Delaire’s craniofacial analysis to Bergen analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2022;26(1):353‐364. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-04006-3
PradhanLShakyaPThapaSNakarmiKKMaharjanAAgrawal SagtaniRRaiSM. Prevalence of dental anomalies in the patient with cleft lip and palate visiting a tertiary care hospital. J Nepal Med Assoc. 2020;58(228):591‐596. doi:https://doi.org/10.31729/jnma.5149
43.
SandyJWilliamsAMildinhallSMurphyTBearnDShawBSellDDevlinBMurrayJ. The clinical standards advisory group (CSAG) cleft lip and palate study. Br J Orthod. 1998;25(1):21‐30. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/25.1.21
44.
ShawWSembGLohmanderAPerssonCWilladsenEClayton-SmithJTrindadeIKMunroKJGambleCHarmanN. Timing of primary surgery for cleft palate (TOPS): protocol for a randomised trial of palate surgery at 6 months versus 12 months of age. BMJ Open. 2019;9(7):e029780. doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJOPEN-2019-029780
45.
KlintöKKarstenAMarcussonAPaganiniARizellSCajanderJBrunnegårdKHakeliusMOkhiriaÅPetersonP, et al.Coverage, reporting degree and design of the Swedish quality registry for patients born with cleft lip and/or palate. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20(1):528. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/S12913-020-05389-X
46.
JonesMCadierM. Implementation of standardized medical photography for cleft lip and palate audit. J Audiov Media Med. 2009;27(4):154‐160. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/01405110500038837
47.
Kuijpers-JagtmanAMNolletPJPMSembGBronkhorstEMShawWCKatsarosC. Reference photographs for nasolabial appearance rating in unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Craniofac Surg. 2009;20(8 SUPPL. 2):1683‐1686. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181b3ed9c
48.
StebelADesmedtDBronkhorstEKuijpersMAFudalejPS. Rating nasolabial appearance on three-dimensional images in cleft lip and palate: a comparison with standard photographs. Eur J Orthod. 2016;38(2):197‐201. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjv024
49.
MosseyPALaiJMeazziniMCBreugemCMarkHMink van der MolenABPerssonMDaviesGOzawaTO. Core outcomes for orofacial clefts: Reconciling traditional and ICHOM minimum datasets. Eur J Orthod. 2023;45(6):671‐679. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjad023
50.
HarrisonCJRodriguesJNFurnissDSwanMC. Response to barriers and facilitators to the international implementation of standardized outcome measures in clinical cleft practice. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2022;59(5):669‐670. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656211015013
51.
NideyNLWehbyG. Barriers to health care for children with orofacial clefts: a systematic literature review and recommendations for research priorities. Oral Health Dent Stud. 2019;2(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.31532/oralhealthdentstud.2.1.002
52.
van der GoesPAJOmbashiSvan RoeyVHakeliusMMathijssenIMJMink van der MolenABVS. The development of a European multidisciplinary cleft lip and palate registry by the European reference network CRANIO: experiences, barriers, and facilitators. J Craniofac Surg. Published online 2024;35(6):1667‐1672. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000010314
53.
TsangarisERiffKWYWGoodacreTForrestCRDreiseMSykesJde ChalainTHarmanKO’MahonyAPusicALThabaneL, 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
54.
LeeJSkolnickGBNaidooSDScheveSGrellnerCSnyder-WarwickAPatelKB. Cost of cleft team care at an academic children’s hospital. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2022;59(11):1428‐1432. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656211046815
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.
