The Development of the Cleft Aesthetic Rating Scale: A New Rating Scale for the Assessment of Nasolabial Appearance in Complete Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online September, 2017
The Development of the Cleft Aesthetic Rating Scale: A New Rating Scale for the Assessment of Nasolabial Appearance in Complete Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients
The development of the Cleft Aesthetic Rating Scale, a simple and reliable photographic reference scale for the assessment of nasolabial appearance in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate patients.
Design:
A blind retrospective analysis of photographs of cleft lip and palate patients was performed with this new rating scale.
Setting:
VU Medical Center Amsterdam and the Academic Center for Dentistry of Amsterdam.
Patients:
Complete unilateral cleft lip and palate patients at the age of 6 years.
Main Outcome Measures:
Photographs that showed the highest interobserver agreement in earlier assessments were selected for the photographic reference scale. Rules were attached to the rating scale to provide a guideline for the assessment and improve interobserver reliability. Cropped photographs revealing only the nasolabial area were assessed by six observers using this new Cleft Aesthetic Rating Scale in two different sessions.
Results:
Photographs of 62 children (6 years of age, 44 boys and 18 girls) were assessed. The interobserver reliability for the nose and lip together was 0.62, obtained with the intraclass correlation coefficient. To measure the internal consistency, a Cronbach alpha of .91 was calculated. The estimated reliability for three observers was .84, obtained with the Spearman Brown formula.
Conclusion:
A new, easy to use, and reliable scoring system with a photographic reference scale is presented in this study.
Al-OmariI, MillettDT, AyoubAF.Methods of assessment of cleft-related facial deformity: a review. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2005; 42: 145–156.
2.
Asher-McDadeC, BrattströmV, DahlE, McWilliamJ, MolstedK, PlintDA, Prahl-AndersenB, SembG, ShawWC, TheRP.A six-center international study of treatment outcome in patients with clefts of the lip and palate. Part 4: assessment of nasolabial appearance. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.1992; 29: 409–412.
3.
Asher-McDadeC, RobertsC, ShawWC, GallagerC.Development of a method for rating nasolabial appearance in patients with clefts of the lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.1991; 28: 385–390.
4.
BergerZE, DaltonLJ.Coping with a cleft: psychosocial adjustment of adolescents with a cleft lip and palate and their parents. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2009; 29: 352–356.
5.
BrattströmV, MØoSlstedK, Prahl-AndersenB, SembG, ShawWC.The Eurocleft study: intercenter study of treatment outcome in patients with complete cleft lip and palate. Part 2: craniofacial form and nasolabial appearance. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2005; 42: 69–77.
6.
CollettBR, SpeltzML. (2006). Social-emotional development of infants and young children with orofacial clefts. Infants Young Child.2006; 19: 262–291.
7.
De LadeiraPR, AlonsoN.Protocols in cleft lip and palate treatment: systematic review. Plast Surg Int.2012; 2012: 562892.
8.
DixonMJ, MarazitaML, BeatyTH, MurrayJC.Cleft lip and palate: understanding genetic and environmental influences. Nat Rev Genet.2011; 12: 167–178.
9.
DraaijersLJ, TempelmanFR, BotmanYAM, TuinebreijerWE, MiddelkoopE, KreisRW, van ZuijlenPPM.The Patient and Observer Assessment Scale for clinical scar assessment: a reliable and feasible tool for scar evaluation. Plast Reconstr Surg.2004; 113: 1960–1965.
10.
FarronatoG, KairyteL, GianniniL, GalbiatiG, MasperoC.How various surgical protocols of the unilateral cleft lip and palate influence the facial growth and possible orthodontic problems. Which is the best timing of lip, palate and alveolus repair? Literature review. Stomatologija.2014; 16: 53–60.
11.
FransFA, van ZuijlenPP, GriotJP, van der HorstCM.Assessment of scar quality after cleft lip closure. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2012; 49: 171–176.
12.
FeragenKB, BorgeAI.Peer harassment and satisfaction with appearance in children with and without a facial difference. Body Image.2010; 7: 97–105.
13.
HuntO, BurdenD, HepperP, JohnstonC.The psychosocial effects of cleft lip and palate: a systematic review. Eur J Orthod.2005; 27: 274–285.
14.
JohnsonN, SandyJ.An aesthetic index for evaluation of cleft repair. Eur J Orthod.2003; 25: 243–249.
15.
KuijpersMAR, ChiuY-T, NadaRM, CarelsCEL, FudalejPS.Three-dimensional imaging methods for quantitative analysis of facial soft tissues and skeletal morphology in patients with orofacial clefts: a systematic review. PLoS ONE.2014: 9: e93442.
16.
Kuijpers-JagtmanAM, NolletPJ, SembG, BronkhorstEM, ShawWC, KatsarosC.Reference photographs for nasolabial appearance rating in unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Craniofac Surg.2009; 20: 1683–1686.
17.
MercadoAM, RussellKA, DaskalogiannakisJ, HathawayRR, SembG, OzawaT, SmithA, LinAY, LongREJr.The Americleft project: a proposed expanded nasolabial appearance yardstick for 5- to 7-year-old patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP). Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2016; 53: 30–37.
18.
MercadoA, RussellK, HathawayR, DaskalogiannakisJ, SadekH, LongREJr, CohenM, SembG, ShawW.The Americleft study: an inter-center study of treatment outcomes for patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Part 4. Nasolabial aesthetics. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2011; 48: 259–264.
19.
MosmullerDG, GriotJP, BijnenCL, MessenFB.Scoring systems of cleft-related facial deformities: a review of literature. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2013; 50: 286–296.
20.
MosmullerDGM, BijnenCL, Don GriotJPW, KramerG, DisseM, PrahlC, KuikDJ, NiessenFB.The Asher-McDade aesthetic index in comparison with two scoring systems in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate patients. J Craniofac Surg.2015; 26: 1242–1245.
PisulaE, LukowskaE, FudalejPS.Self-esteem, coping styles, and quality of life in Polish adolescents and young adults with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.201; 51: 290–299.
23.
PrahlC, Prahl-AndersenB, van't HofMA, Kuijpers-JagtmanAM.Infant orthopedics and facial appearance: a randomized clinical trial (Dutchcleft). Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2006; 43: 659–664.
24.
Queiroz HerkrathAP, HerkrathFJ, RebeloMA, VettoreMV.Measurement of health-related and oral health-related quality of life among individuals with nonsyndromic orofacial clefts: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2015; 52: 157–172.
25.
RumseyN, StockNM.Living with a cleft: psychological challenges, support and intervention. In: BerkowitzS, ed. Cleft Lip and Palate: Diagnosis and Management.3 rd ed. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2013: 907–915.
26.
SharmaVP, BellaH, CadierMM, PigottRW, GoodacreTE, RichardBM.Outcomes in facial aesthetics in cleft lip and palate surgery: a systematic review. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg.2012; 65: 1233–1245.
27.
StreinerDL, NormanGR.Reliability. Health measurement scales.Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008: 167–210.
28.
TinsleyHE, WeissDJ.Interrater reliability and agreement of subjective judgments. J Couns Psychol.1975; 22: 358–376.
29.
VegterF, HageJJ.Standardized facial photography of cleft patients: just fit the grid?Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2000; 37: 435–440.
