Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Child's Nervous System 3/2024

Open Access 02-11-2023 | Craniosynostosis | Original Article

Patient-reported outcome measures more than fifteen years after treatment of sagittal or metopic craniosynostosis: a prospective cohort study

Authors: Peter A. Woerdeman, Vita M. Klieverik, Alexander Cheong, Ash Singhal, Douglas Cochrane, Paul Steinbok

Published in: Child's Nervous System | Issue 3/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the long-term anthropometric measurements, cosmetic satisfaction, and other patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of patients who underwent surgical treatment or observation only of sagittal or metopic single-suture craniosynostosis (SSC).

Methods

A prospective study was designed for all patients diagnosed with non-syndromic sagittal and metopic craniosynostosis at the British Columbia Children’s Hospital, Vancouver, Canada, in the period July 1986 to July 2006. After a minimum of 15 years post-diagnosis, all eligible patients were invited to fill out the Craniofacial Surgery Outcomes Questionnaire (CSO-Q) and to attend a scheduled follow-up appointment for the collection of anthropometric measurements. A descriptive analysis of the cosmetic results was performed. Statistical analyses compared the differences in anthropometric measurements between treated and non-treated patients.

Results

Of the 253 eligible patients, 52 participants were willing to share patient data for use in the study. Of those 52 former patients, 36 (69.2%) filled out and returned the CSO-Q and 23 (44.2%) attended the follow-up appointment. The mean follow-up period between surgical treatment and the CSO-Q was 20.2 ± 2.5 years and between surgical treatment and the follow-up appointment was 20.9 ± 2.7 years. In patients with sagittal SSC, the mean cephalic index (CI) was significantly larger in treated than in non-treated patients (74.6 versus 69.1, p = 0.04), while the mean pupillary distance and forehead to back index were significantly smaller (pupillary distance 6.0 cm versus 6.7 cm [p = 0.04] and forehead to back index 19.6 cm versus 21.1 cm [p = 0.03]). Focusing more on the patient reported outcome measures, overall cosmetic satisfaction was found to be high (80.6%) and no differences were found between sagittal and metopic synostosis patients, nor between treated or non-treated craniosynostosis patients. Overall outcomes regarding self-esteem (RSES) and fear of negative evaluation (FNE) were comparable with population based outcomes.

Conclusion

This is the first prospective study of sagittal and metopic craniosynostosis patients regarding long-term anthropometric outcome and patient reported outcome measures, including patients who were treated surgically and those who received observation only. Although study participation two decades after initial diagnosis was difficult to obtain, our data provide a platform from which one can develop an inclusive and uniform approach to assess patients’ subjective cosmetic satisfaction using the CSO-Questionnaire and might be useful in preoperative counseling and psychosocial care for patients and their families.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
5.
go back to reference Salokorpi N, Savolainen T, Sinikumpu JJ, Ylikontiola L, Sándor GK, Pirttiniemi P, Serlo W (2019) Outcomes of 40 nonsyndromic sagittal craniosynostosis patients as adults: a case-control study with 26 years of postoperative follow-up. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 16(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ons/opy047CrossRefPubMed Salokorpi N, Savolainen T, Sinikumpu JJ, Ylikontiola L, Sándor GK, Pirttiniemi P, Serlo W (2019) Outcomes of 40 nonsyndromic sagittal craniosynostosis patients as adults: a case-control study with 26 years of postoperative follow-up. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 16(1):1–8. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1093/​ons/​opy047CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Rosenberg M (1965) Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJCrossRef Rosenberg M (1965) Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Watson D, Friend R (1969) Measurement of social-evaluative anxiety. J Consult Clin Psychol 33(4):448–457CrossRefPubMed Watson D, Friend R (1969) Measurement of social-evaluative anxiety. J Consult Clin Psychol 33(4):448–457CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Sinclair SJ, Blais MA, Gansler DA, Sandberg E, Bistis K, LoCicero A (2010) Psychometric properties of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: overall and across demographic groups living within the United States. Eval Health Prof 33(1):56–80CrossRefPubMed Sinclair SJ, Blais MA, Gansler DA, Sandberg E, Bistis K, LoCicero A (2010) Psychometric properties of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: overall and across demographic groups living within the United States. Eval Health Prof 33(1):56–80CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Musa C, Kostogianni N, Lépine JP (2004) The fear of negative evaluation scale (FNE): psychometric properties of the French version. Encephale 30(6):517–524CrossRefPubMed Musa C, Kostogianni N, Lépine JP (2004) The fear of negative evaluation scale (FNE): psychometric properties of the French version. Encephale 30(6):517–524CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Patient-reported outcome measures more than fifteen years after treatment of sagittal or metopic craniosynostosis: a prospective cohort study
Authors
Peter A. Woerdeman
Vita M. Klieverik
Alexander Cheong
Ash Singhal
Douglas Cochrane
Paul Steinbok
Publication date
02-11-2023
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Child's Nervous System / Issue 3/2024
Print ISSN: 0256-7040
Electronic ISSN: 1433-0350
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-023-06202-w

Other articles of this Issue 3/2024

Child's Nervous System 3/2024 Go to the issue