Search

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.