Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Cleft Lip and Palate | Protocol

Non-Interventional Factors Influencing Velopharyngeal Function For Speech In Initial Cleft Palate Repair: A Systematic Review Protocol

Authors: David Sainsbury, Caroline Williams, Catherine de Blacam, Joanne Mullen, Ambika Chadha, Yvonne Wren, Peter Hodgkinson, Cleft Multidisciplinary Collaborative

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

This systematic review aims to inform the development of a screening tool which pre-operatively predicts which children are likely to develop velopharyngeal insufficiency, one of the causes of poor speech outcomes, following cleft palate repair. This would be highly beneficial as it would inform pre-operative counselling of parents, allow targeted speech and language therapy, and enable meaningful comparison of outcomes between surgeons, techniques, and institutions. Currently, it is unclear which factors influence speech outcomes. A systematic review investigating the non-interventional factors which potentially influence speech outcomes following cleft palate repair is warranted. This may be illuminating in itself or provide foundations for future studies.

Methods

A systematic review will be carried out according to Cochrane methodology and reported according to PRISMA guidelines (PLoS Med 6: e1000097, 2009). Systematic review software will be used to facilitate three-stage screening by two independent reviewers experienced in cleft lip and palate. Thereafter, data extraction and GRADE assessment will be performed in duplicate by five independent reviewers experienced in cleft lip and palate. Studies reporting the proportion of patients who were recommended or underwent secondary speech surgery for velopharyngeal insufficiency following primary surgery for cleft palate will be included.
The study findings will be tabulated and summarised. The primary outcome measure will be further speech surgery (either recommended or performed). The secondary outcome measure will be perceptual speech assessment for the presence of velopharyngeal insufficiency. A meta-analysis is planned. However, if this is not possible, due to the anticipated marked heterogeneity of study characteristics, pre-operative assessment, and the recorded outcome measures, a narrative synthesis will be undertaken.

Discussion

This systematic review may provide sufficient data to inform the development of a screening tool to predict the risk of velopharyngeal insufficiency prior to cleft palate repair. However, it is anticipated that these findings will provide the foundation for future studies in this area.

Systematic review registration

Registered on 19 December 2016 with PROSPERO CRD42017051624
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bero L, Chartres N, Diong J, Fabbri A, Ghersi D, Lam J, et al. The risk of bias in observational studies of exposures (ROBINS-E) tool: concerns arising from application to observational studies of exposures. Systematic Reviews. 2018;7(1):242.CrossRef Bero L, Chartres N, Diong J, Fabbri A, Ghersi D, Lam J, et al. The risk of bias in observational studies of exposures (ROBINS-E) tool: concerns arising from application to observational studies of exposures. Systematic Reviews. 2018;7(1):242.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference de Blacam C, Smith S, Orr D. Surgery for velopharyngeal dysfunction: a systematic review of interventions and outcomes. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2018;55(3):405–22.CrossRef de Blacam C, Smith S, Orr D. Surgery for velopharyngeal dysfunction: a systematic review of interventions and outcomes. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2018;55(3):405–22.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Choa RM, Slator R, Jeremy A, Robinson S, Franklin D, Roberts A, et al. Identifying the effect of cleft type, deprivation and ethnicity on speech and dental outcomes in UK cleft patients: a multi-centred study. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery : JPRAS. 2014;67(12):1637–43.CrossRef Choa RM, Slator R, Jeremy A, Robinson S, Franklin D, Roberts A, et al. Identifying the effect of cleft type, deprivation and ethnicity on speech and dental outcomes in UK cleft patients: a multi-centred study. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery : JPRAS. 2014;67(12):1637–43.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Dodd B, Holm A, Hua Z, Crosbie S. Phonological development: a normative study of British English-speaking children. Clin Linguist Phon. 2003;17:617–43.CrossRef Dodd B, Holm A, Hua Z, Crosbie S. Phonological development: a normative study of British English-speaking children. Clin Linguist Phon. 2003;17:617–43.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:924.CrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:924.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Higgins A, Altman D, Sterne J. Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins J, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available at: www.handbook.cochrane.org. Higgins A, Altman D, Sterne J. Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins J, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available at: www.​handbook.​cochrane.​org.
8.
go back to reference Mahoney MH, Swan MC, Fisher DM. Prospective analysis of presurgical risk factors for outcomes in primary palatoplasty. Plast Recon Surg. 2013;132(1):165–71.CrossRef Mahoney MH, Swan MC, Fisher DM. Prospective analysis of presurgical risk factors for outcomes in primary palatoplasty. Plast Recon Surg. 2013;132(1):165–71.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.CrossRef Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Morgan RL, Whaley P, Thayer K, Schünemann HJ. Identifying the PECO: a framework for formulating good questions to explore the association of environmental and other exposures with health outcomes. Environ Int. 2018;121(Pt 1):1027–31.CrossRef Morgan RL, Whaley P, Thayer K, Schünemann HJ. Identifying the PECO: a framework for formulating good questions to explore the association of environmental and other exposures with health outcomes. Environ Int. 2018;121(Pt 1):1027–31.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Parwaz MA, Sharma RK, Parashar A, Nanda V, Biswas G, Makkar S.Width of cleft palate and postoperative palatal fistula--do they correlate? J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2009;62(12):1559–63.CrossRef Parwaz MA, Sharma RK, Parashar A, Nanda V, Biswas G, Makkar S.Width of cleft palate and postoperative palatal fistula--do they correlate? J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2009;62(12):1559–63.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Pigott RW. Objectives for cleft palate repair. Ann Plast Surg. 1987;19(3):247–59.CrossRef Pigott RW. Objectives for cleft palate repair. Ann Plast Surg. 1987;19(3):247–59.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Randall P, LaRossa D, McWilliams BJ, Cohen M, Solot C, Jawad AF. Palatal length in cleft palate as a predictor of speech outcome. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000;106(6):1254-9; discussion 1260–1.CrossRef Randall P, LaRossa D, McWilliams BJ, Cohen M, Solot C, Jawad AF. Palatal length in cleft palate as a predictor of speech outcome. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000;106(6):1254-9; discussion 1260–1.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Sell D, Harding A, Grunwell P. GOS.SP,ASS.'98: an assessment for speech disorders associated with cleft palate and/or velopharyngeal dysfunction (revised). Int J Lang Commun Disord. 1999;34:17–33.CrossRef Sell D, Harding A, Grunwell P. GOS.SP,ASS.'98: an assessment for speech disorders associated with cleft palate and/or velopharyngeal dysfunction (revised). Int J Lang Commun Disord. 1999;34:17–33.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Sitzman TJ, Hossain M, Carle AC, Heaton PC, Britto MT. Variation among cleft centres in the use of secondary surgery for children with cleft palate: a retrospective cohort study. BMJ Paediatr Open. 2017;1(1):e000063–8.CrossRef Sitzman TJ, Hossain M, Carle AC, Heaton PC, Britto MT. Variation among cleft centres in the use of secondary surgery for children with cleft palate: a retrospective cohort study. BMJ Paediatr Open. 2017;1(1):e000063–8.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Smillie I, Yong K, Harris K, Wynne DM, Russell CJ. Socioeconomic influence on orofacial cleft patient care. Scott Med J. 2015;60(2):70–4.CrossRef Smillie I, Yong K, Harris K, Wynne DM, Russell CJ. Socioeconomic influence on orofacial cleft patient care. Scott Med J. 2015;60(2):70–4.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Smith DM, Losee JE. Cleft palate repair. Clin Plast Surg. 2014;41:189–210.CrossRef Smith DM, Losee JE. Cleft palate repair. Clin Plast Surg. 2014;41:189–210.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Stein MJ, Zhang Z, Fell M, Mercer N, Malic C. Determining postoperative outcomes after cleft palate repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2019;72(1):85–91.CrossRef Stein MJ, Zhang Z, Fell M, Mercer N, Malic C. Determining postoperative outcomes after cleft palate repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2019;72(1):85–91.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Non-Interventional Factors Influencing Velopharyngeal Function For Speech In Initial Cleft Palate Repair: A Systematic Review Protocol
Authors
David Sainsbury
Caroline Williams
Catherine de Blacam
Joanne Mullen
Ambika Chadha
Yvonne Wren
Peter Hodgkinson
Cleft Multidisciplinary Collaborative
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1141-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Systematic Reviews 1/2019 Go to the issue