Search

BACKGROUND: Speech development requires intact and adequately functioning oral anatomy and cognitive 'speech processing' skills. There is evidence that speech input processing skills are associated with speech output problems in children not born with a cleft. Children born with cleft palate ± lip (CP±L) are at high risk of developing disordered speech output. Less is known about their speech input processing skills and whether they are associated with cleft-related speech sound disorder (SSD). AIMS: (1) To collate and evaluate studies reporting evidence regarding the speech input processing skills of children born with cleft palate in comparison with data from typically developing children or other comparison groups; and (2) to identify any available evidence regarding relationships between speech input processing skills and speech output in children born with CP±L. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Potentially relevant studies published up to November 2019 were identified from the following databases: Medline via Ovid, Embase via Ovid, Cinahl via Ebscohost, PsycInfo via Ebscohost, BNI via ProQuest, AMED via Ovid, Cochrane Library and Scopus. Inclusion criteria were: peer-reviewed articles published in scientific journals, any design, published in English, participants born with a CP±L aged up to age 18 years who completed speech input processing assessments compared with normative data and/or a control or other comparison group. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists were used to quality appraise included studies. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Six studies were retained in the final review. There is some evidence that children born with CP±L perform less well than non-cleft controls on some speech input processing tasks and that specific input processing skills may be related to errors in the children's speech. Heterogeneity in relation to study groups and assessments used, as well as small sample sizes, limits generalization of findings. CONCLUSION & IMPLICATIONS: There is limited evidence regarding the speech input processing skills of children born with CP±L. There are indications that children born with CP+/L may have difficulty in some aspects of speech input processing in comparison with children not born with a cleft, and that difficulties with some speech input processing tasks may be specific to errors in children's speech output. Further research is required to develop our understanding of these skills in this population and any associations with speech output. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Few studies have been published that examine aspects of speech input processing in children born with CP±L. Theoretical models of speech processing, and published studies, propose that speech input processing skills are associated with SSD in children who were not born with a cleft. However, it is less clear whether there is any association between speech input processing and cleft-related SSD. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This review systematically collates and evaluates the published, peer-reviewed evidence regarding speech input processing skills in children born with CP±L. The collated evidence indicates that some speech input processing skills differ between children with and without CP±L. There is some evidence, from a single study, that speech input processing of specific cleft speech characteristics (CSCs) may be associated with the presence of these CSCs in the speech output of some children born with CP±L. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? While the evidence is currently limited, increasing our knowledge of speech input processing skills in children born with CP±L contributes to our clinical understanding of the nature of cleft-related SSD. The current evidence suggests that speech and language therapists should consider speech input processing skills when assessing children with cleft-related SSD to support intervention planning. Considering these skills in relation to literacy development in these children may also be important.

BACKGROUND: As a growing paradigm of health research, trainee collaboratives can influence clinical practice through the generation of cost-effective multicenter audit and research projects. The aims of the present article are to outline and discuss the establishment of a multidisciplinary collaborative in the context of cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P).METHODS: The Cleft Multidisciplinary Collaborative (CMC) was formed in April 2016 under the overarching supervision of the National Institute for Health Research. Membership of the CMC is open to all members of the CL/P multidisciplinary team, who are encouraged to submit ideas for new research projects that will benefit clinical practice.RESULTS: To date, 48 clinical participants are involved in the CMC. These participants represent all 17 cleft teams from the United Kingdom and encompass a wide range of disciplines. The CMC has undertaken 2 major projects so far. The first involved collection of phenotype data to support a national cohort study. The second, still in progress, is a systematic review investigating factors associated with outcomes for velopharyngeal competence following cleft palate repair.CONCLUSIONS: The concept of a multidisciplinary collaborative in CL/P has been demonstrated through the generation of a United Kingdom-wide network of committed clinicians and researchers and the effective undertaking of 2 large research projects. As the CMC gathers momentum, it hopes to attract funding to support its activities, to promote more involvement from the allied health and nursing professions, to encourage a more ingrained research culture within the CL/P community, and to promote the wider ambition of a global collaborative.

ObjectivesTo investigate centre-level variation in speech intervention and outcome and factors associated with a speech disorder in children in Cleft Care UK (CCUK).Setting and Sample PopulationTwo hundred and sixty-eight 5-year-old British children with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate recruited to CCUK.Materials and MethodsCentre-based therapists undertook audio-video recordings. Perceptual analysis was undertaken using the CAPS-A tool. Speech outcomes were based on structural and articulation scores, and intelligibility/distinctiveness. Between-centre variation in treatment and outcomes were examined using multilevel models. These models were extended to estimate the association between a range of factors (hearing loss, speech intervention, fistula, secondary speech surgery for velopharyngeal insufficiency, socio-economic status, gender, and parental happiness with speech) and speech outcomes.ResultsThere was centre-level variation in secondary speech surgery, speech intervention, structure and intelligibility outcomes. Children with a history of speech intervention had a lower odds of poor intelligibility/distinctiveness, 0.1 (95% CI: 0.0-0.4). Parental concern was associated with a higher odds of poor intelligibility/distinctiveness, 13.2 (95% CI: 4.9-35.1). Poor speech outcomes were associated with a fistula, secondary speech surgery and history of hearing loss.ConclusionsWithin the centralized service there is centre-level variation in secondary speech surgery, intervention and speech outcomes. These findings support the importance of early management of fistulae, effective management of velopharyngeal insufficiency and hearing impairment, and most importantly speech intervention in the preschool years. Parental concern about speech is a good indicator of speech status.

ObjectivesTo summarize and discuss centre-level variation across a range of treatment and outcome measures and examine individual and ecological determinants of outcome in children in Cleft Care UK (CCUK).Setting and sample populationTwo hundred and sixty-eight 5-year-old British children with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) recruited to CCUK and treated within a centralized service.Materials and MethodsChildren had a range of treatment and outcome measures collected at a 5-year audit clinic. These outcomes included dento-alveolar arch relationships from study models, measures of facial appearance from cropped photographs, hearing loss from audiological assessment, speech from speech recordings, self-confidence and strengths and difficulties from parental self-report. Data were collected on educational attainment at age 7 using record linkage. Centre variation was examined using hierarchical regression and associations between variables were examined using logistic or poisson regression.ResultsThere was centre-level variation for some treatments (early grommet placement, fitting of hearing aids, fluoride treatment, secondary speech surgery and treatment for cleft speech characteristics) and for some outcomes (intelligibility of speech). Hearing loss was associated with a higher risk of poor speech while speech therapy was associated with a lower risk of poor speech. Children had high levels of caries but levels of preventative treatment (fluoride varnish and tablets) were low.ConclusionsFurther improvements to and monitoring of the current centralized model of care are required to ensure the best outcomes for all children with cleft lip and palate.