Search

Background: Outpatient prescriptions for postoperative pain play an important role in the opioid epidemic. Prescribing guidelines are an effective target for intervention but require procedure-specific data to be successful. The aim of this study was to examine opioid prescribing patterns and pain control after primary cleft lip and palate repair at a large academic center., Methods: Children undergoing cleft lip and palate repair from April of 2018 to July of 2019 were included in a prospective cohort study. Data on discharge prescriptions, refills, and emergency room visits were obtained from the medical record. Caregivers were surveyed 7 to 21 days after surgery regarding pain control, opioid use, education exposure, storage, and disposal. Chi-square tests and one-way analysis of variance were used to examine predictors of pain control, opioid consumption, safe storage, and disposal., Results: After screening, 59 children were included in the study. Patients were 55.8 percent male with a median age of 12 months (interquartile range, 5 to 15). Ninety percent of patients received an opioid prescription at discharge with a mean quantity of 10 doses (interquartile range, 5 to 15). Ninety-seven percent of caregivers used adjunct medication. Opioids were given for a median of 3 days (interquartile range, 2 to 6.5). Seventy-six percent of caregivers gave less opioid than prescribed. There was no association between pain control and opioid quantity ( p = 0.68). Twenty-four percent of caregivers used locked storage. Thirty-four percent of respondents with leftover medication reported disposal., Conclusions: Opioids are often overprescribed after cleft lip and palate repair. Providers should consider limiting prescriptions to a 3-day supply to help reduce the quantity of opioids available in the community., (Copyright © 2022 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.)

Introduction: Children with cleft are at high risk for sleep-disordered breathing (SDB). However, little is known about the impact of SDB in this pediatric population. The aim of this study was to investigate whether SDB play a role in behavior and quality of life (QoL) in young children with cleft., Methods: Cross-sectional study of 95 children aged 2.0-7.9 years with cleft palate. Parents completed a sleep (Pediatric Sleep questionnaire), a behavior (Conners' Early Childhood scale), and a generic health-related QoL (KINDL questionnaire) assessment. Symptomatic children were referred for a polysomnography (PSG)., Results: Overall, 14.7% of children (49.5% boys) screened positive for SDB and 27.4% had a PSG, which identified 84.6% with sleep apnea (apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] ≥1) and 27.2% with AHI ≥5. Positive screening for SDB was associated with elevated T-scores for anxiety and physical symptoms, significant differences in mean T-scores for inattention/hyperactivity (64.2 ± 15.7 vs. 53.9 ± 11.4, p = .02), social functioning/atypical behaviour, social functioning (60.6 ± 11.7 vs. 51.9 ± 7.3, p = .004 and 59.5 ± 10.9 vs. 51.2 ± 8.0, p = .01) and mood (57.5 ± 8.2 vs. 50.7 ± 8.2, p = .03). Lower QoL scores for emotional and family well-being were also reported in children with SDB (80.7 ± 13.4 vs. 90.0 ± 8.7, p = .01, 66.7 ± 15.8 vs. 76.9 ± 11.9, p = .04). Children with AHI ≥5 compared to those with AHI ≥1 and <5 showed significant differences in mean T-score for aggressive behaviour (65.2 ± 12.1 vs. 52.3 ± 11.3, p = .04), defiant temper (62.8 ± 9.2 vs. 51.6 ± 10.2, p = .03) and lower family QoL scores (59.4 ± 15.2 vs. 77.1 ± 9.6, p = .006)., Conclusions: In children with cleft palate the presence of SDB symptoms and moderate/severe sleep apnea was associated with behavioral (internalizing/externalizing) problems and lower family well-being., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Facial differences associated with cleft lips are often stigmatizing and can negatively impact psychosocial development and quality of life. However, little is known regarding patients' responses to societal expectations of appearance, or how these responses may impact utilization of revision surgery. Thus, patients with cleft lips at least 8 years of age (n = 31) were purposively sampled for semi-structured interviews. After verbatim transcription, first cycle coding proceeded with a semantic approach, which revealed patterns that warranted second cycle coding. The authors utilized an eclectic coding design to capture deeper meanings in thematic analysis. Additionally, survey data from a separate study were examined to evaluate participants' interest in improving appearance. Three major themes emerged, all of which reflected a desire to "save face" when interacting with society: (1) Cultural Mantras, which included societal mottos that minimized the importance of appearance; (2) Toughening Up, wherein the participants downplayed the difficulty of having a cleft; and (3) Deflection, wherein the participants took pride in facial features unrelated to their clefts. Despite these efforts to "save face," 78% of participants expressed interest in improving their appearance in the separate survey data.In conclusion, children with cleft lips try to "save face" when interacting with society by depreciating appearance, making light of clefts, and focusing on non-cleft related features. Paradoxically, many desired improvements of their appearance in an earlier survey. Awareness of these coping strategies is critical, as they may negatively impact surgeon-patient communication and inhibit patients from expressing interest in revision surgery.

Objective: Preference-sensitive surgical decisions merit shared decision-making, as decision engagement can reduce decisional conflict and regret. Elective cleft-related procedures are often preference sensitive, and therefore, we sought to better understand decision-making in this population., Design: Semistructured interviews were conducted to elicit qualitative data. A hierarchical codebook was developed through an iterative process in preparation for thematic analysis. Thematic analysis was performed to examine differences between patients and caregivers., Setting: Multidisciplinary cleft clinic at a tertiary care center., Participants: Patients with cleft lip aged 8 and older (n = 31) and their caregivers (n = 31) were purposively sampled. Inability to converse in English, intellectual disability, or syndromic diagnoses resulted in exclusion., Main Outcome Measures: Preferences surrounding surgical decision-making identified during thematic analysis., Results: Mean patient age was 12.7 (standard deviation: 3.1). Most had unilateral cleft lip and palate (43.8%). Three themes emerged: Insufficient Understanding of Facial Difference and Treatment, Diversity of Surgical Indications, and Barriers to Patient Autonomy. Almost half of caregivers believed their children understood their clefts, but most of these children failed to provide information about their cleft. Although many patients and caregivers acknowledged that surgery addressed function and/or appearance, patients and caregivers exhibited differences regarding the necessity of surgery. Furthermore, a large proportion of patients believed their opinions mattered in decisions, but less than half of caregivers agreed., Conclusions: Patients with clefts desire to participate in surgical decisions but have limited understanding of their facial difference and surgical indications. Cleft surgeons must educate patients and facilitate shared decision-making.

Background: Although revision surgery is part of the reconstructive process for children with cleft lip and/or cleft palate, the indications for revision vary, and the extent to which surgeons and families agree on appearance is unclear. The authors sought to understand the extent to which children with cleft lip and/or cleft palate, surgeons, caregivers, and control observers agree on satisfaction with appearance and the desire for revision., Methods: Children with cleft lip and/or cleft palate (n = 100) and their caregivers (n = 100) were surveyed regarding satisfaction with appearance using the Cleft Evaluation Profile. Surgeons (n = 10) and control observers (n = 10) rated photographs of these children using questions analogous to the Cleft Evaluation Profile. General linear model repeated measures analysis of variance were used to detect significant differences between raters, with an alpha of 0.05., Results: The children reported greater satisfaction with appearance across all domains compared with surgeons (nose, 7.77 versus 5.51, p < 0.001; lip, 7.94 versus 5.90, p < 0.001; maxilla, 8.16 versus 6.56, p < 0.001) and general observers (nose, 7.78 versus 6.00, p < 0.001; lip, 7.80 versus 6.12, p < 0.001; maxilla, 8.16 versus 7.40, p < 0.001). Children and caregivers expressed similar degrees of satisfaction with appearance of the lip (5.48 ± 1.69 versus 5.6 ± 1.49, p > 0.5) and maxilla (6.08 ± 1.1 versus 5.8 ± 1.2, p = 0.07). There was no significant relationship between children and surgeons in terms of the desire for revision surgery (p = 0.44)., Conclusions: All groups expressed differing levels of satisfaction with cleft-specific aspects of appearance. Importantly, children were more satisfied than all other groups. Care must be taken to evaluate perceptions of all stakeholders before moving forward with cleft revision surgery.

Background: For children with cleft lip and/or palate, access to care is vital for optimizing speech, appearance, and psychosocial outcomes. The authors posited that inadequate access to care negatively impacts outcomes in this population., Methods: Sixty caregivers of children with cleft lip and palate were surveyed to assess perceived barriers using the validated Barriers to Care questionnaire. The questionnaire includes 39 items divided into five subscales, with higher scores indicating fewer barriers. Caregiver-reported outcomes were assessed using the Cleft Evaluation Profile, which captures cleft-specific appearance- and speech-related outcomes. Higher scores correspond to less satisfactory outcomes. Desire for revision surgery was assessed as a binary outcome among caregivers. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate the relationship of barriers to care, caregiver-reported outcomes, and desire for revision, adjusting for clinical and demographic covariates., Results: Sixty percent of caregivers perceived barriers to care, and caregivers who reported poorer access to care described poorer cleft-related outcomes (r = 0.19, p = 0.024). Caregivers with poorer skills (r = 0.17, p = 0.037), expectations (r = 0.17, p = 0.045), and pragmatics (r = 0.18, p = 0.026) subscale scores were associated with worse Cleft Evaluation Profile scores. Barriers were also negatively associated with aesthetic item scores (r = 0.11, p = 0.025). Finally, caregivers reporting fewer barriers were 21.2 percent less likely to express interest in revision surgery., Conclusions: Barriers to care were associated with poorer appearance-related outcomes and increased interest in revision among caregivers of cleft patients. Enhancing access to care is critical in order to effectively meet goals of care for these families.

Background: Buccal fat is often used as a pedicled flap in cleft palate repairs to minimize scarring and fortify tenuous closures. Although many surgeons have adopted this technique, others have remained circumspect because of the concern for subsequent facial asymmetry., Methods: Patients who underwent cleft palate repair using buccal fat pad flaps for closure between 2007 and 2015 were reviewed. Only patients with unilateral buccal fat pad flaps and three-dimensional photography were included. Volumetric analysis was performed on each patient to measure cheek volumes of both the flap and nonflap sides. A subgroup analysis on cleft palate and bilateral cleft lip and palate patients was performed to eliminate the confounding asymmetries of unilateral cleft lip and palate patients. Paired t tests were used to determine differences in cheek volumes. In addition, three reviewers examined photographs of patients and were asked to determine the side of fat pad harvest., Results: Twenty-four patients met inclusion criteria. Mean follow-up was 55 months. The volume difference between the flap and nonflap sides was not significant (p = 0.81). Subgroup analysis on cleft palate and bilateral cleft lip and palate patients did not reveal a volume difference between the flap and nonflap sides (p = 0.98). When asked to determine which side buccal fat pads were harvested from based on patient photographs, the average percentage correct for three independent reviewers was 57 percent and the Cohen's kappa was -0.084, indicating poor agreement., Conclusion: Although the buccal fat pad is thought to play a role in facial aesthetics, the authors found no difference in volume between harvest and nonharvest sides, nor was there a clinically detectable difference., Clinical Question/level of Evidence: Therapeutic, IV.

Background: In bilateral cleft patients, surgeons usually attempt to move the premaxillary segment posteriorly. These patients almost always develop maxillary hypoplasia, rendering our current algorithms questionable. The authors sought to determine if the lateral segments are in an appropriate position to serve as a target for movement of the premaxilla., Methods: Bilateral cleft lip and palate patients treated at the University of Michigan from 1997 to 2015 were reviewed. Patients with skull radiographs or computed tomography (CT) imaging performed at age 3 or younger were included. Noncleft patients <3 years old seen in the craniofacial clinic during 2015 with negative imaging were included as comparative norms. Sella-nasion-A (SNA), sella-nasion-piriform (SNP), and sella-nasion-posterior nasal spine (SN-PNS) angles were determined in both the cleft patients and the comparative norms. Paired t tests assuming unequal variance were used to compare angles between normal and cleft patients., Results: Eighty-six bilateral cleft patients were identified, and 16 had imaging. Only 7 patients had a CT or skull radiograph. Thirteen noncleft patients with negative imaging were included. The mean SNA angle was 100.8 in cleft patients and 86.1 in noncleft patients (P = 0.002). The mean SNP angle was 62.9 in cleft patients and 71.3 in noncleft patients (P = 0.02). The mean SN-PNS angle was 23.2 in cleft patients and 33.8 in noncleft patients (P = 0.005)., Conclusions: Our results indicate that the maxilla is deficient early in life with posterior positioning of the lateral segments. Therefore, the lateral segments should not serve as a reference point when treating the premaxilla.

Objective: To determine if all cleft surgeons uniformly and adequately evaluate patients with cleft for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and consider OSA in treatment of velopharyngeal dysfunction (VPD)., Design: A 22-question survey was administered via e-mail to 1117 surgeons who were members of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association. Logistic regression was used to determine if management was affected by years in practice, clinical volume, field of training, and region of practice., Main Outcome Measures: We sought to determine if years in practice, clinical volume, region of practice, and surgical specialty affected surgeons' evaluation of OSA and their approaches to VPD., Results: A total of 231 surgeons responded (21% response rate), and 67% stated that they had trained in plastic surgery. With increasing years of practice, surgeons were less likely to refer patients for preoperative and postoperative sleep studies (P = .00 and P = .001, respectively), screen patients for sleep apnea (P = .008), or change their management based on a sleep study (P = .001). There were no significant differences in screening or testing for OSA based upon clinical volume. Among those surveyed, otolaryngologists were more likely to refer patients for postoperative sleep studies (P = .028). Surgeons in the Southeast were more likely to change their management based upon a sleep study (P = .038)., Conclusions: Statistically significant trends in screening and testing for OSA in the setting of VPD were identified by this survey. Notably, older surgeons were less likely to investigate OSA in their patients, and not all specialties equally refer for postoperative sleep studies.

Background: Health-related quality of life is inconsistently captured among children with cleft lip and palate. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) captures health-related quality of life, with the added benefit of comparability across clinical conditions. In this study, the authors define the validity and feasibility of PROMIS among children with clefts., Methods: Children with cleft lip and palate who were at least 5 years old and able to complete instruments independently were eligible for inclusion (n = 93). Children completed PROMIS anxiety, depression, and peer relationship item banks as short forms or computerized adaptive tests. Participants also completed the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory. Construct validity was measured by Spearman correlations between PROMIS and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory controlling for race, sex, age, and income. Feasibility was measured using instrument completion time, reading level, and floor/ceiling effects., Results: PROMIS computerized adaptive tests (peer relationship, r = 0.49; depression, r = -0.56; and anxiety, r = -0.36) and short forms (peer relationship, r = 0.65; depression, r = -0.54; and anxiety, r = -0.56) demonstrated moderate correlation with the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory. Computerized adaptive tests had fewer floor (0 percent versus 0 percent) and ceiling (8.6 to 19.3 percent versus 21.8 to 41.9 percent) effects than short forms, and demonstrated better readability. Computerized adaptive tests required more time than short forms (peer relationship, 0.84 ± 0.67 versus 1.3 ± 0.92; depression, 0.52 ± 0.38 versus 1.1 ± 0.73; and anxiety, 0.53 ± 0.23 versus 1.1 ± 0.62; p = 0.001), as each computerized adaptive test included on average four more questions., Conclusions: PROMIS correlates well with the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory and demonstrates similar accuracy, with better readability and efficiency. Use of PROMIS will improve our ability to compare children with cleft lip and palate to diverse populations and clinical conditions., Clinical Question/level of Evidence: Diagnostic, II.

Purpose: Children with cleft lip with or without palate (CLCP) require multiple reconstructive procedures, however, little is known about their desire for surgical revision. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and the desire for revision., Methods: The authors surveyed children with CLCP (n = 71) and their caregivers regarding general and cleft-specific HRQOL and the desire for revision surgery. The authors used logistic regression models to evaluate the relationship between HRQOL and the desire for revision stratified by age, and determined the level of agreement between caregivers and children., Results: In this cohort, 54.9% of children desired revision, primarily of the nose (n = 23), lip (n = 20), and dentoalveolar structures (n = 19). Children 11 years or older were more likely to desire revision than younger children (OR 3.39, 95% CI [1.19, 9.67], P <0.05). Children who reported poorer HRQOL with respect to appearance (OR 2.31, 95% CI [1.25-4.29], P = 0.008), social development (OR 0.91, 95% CI [0.84-0.99], P = 0.02), and communication (OR 0.94, 95% CI [0.89-0.99], P = 0.02) were significantly more likely to desire revision than children who reported more positive HRQOL. Caregivers' and children's desires for revision were only modestly correlated (r = 0.41)., Conclusions: Children with CLCP who report poorer HRQOL are more likely to desire revision than children with higher HRQOL; these differences are further magnified among older children. Given the modest correlation between patient and caregiver goals for revision, it is important to evaluate both perspectives when considering revision surgery.

Background: Anaphylaxis and anaphylactic-like reactions in the perioperative period are a significant concern for anesthesiologists and surgeons. With an incidence as high as one in 3500 and a mortality rate of 3 to 6 percent, proper management of these reactions is essential. The available surgical literature provides varied and unclear guidelines for determining the nature of these reactions and has no consensus treatment algorithm. The authors present a rare case of hypersensitivity reaction to methylene blue during cleft lip repair. A review of current literature for best-practice evaluation and management guidelines follows., Methods: Literature review was performed using search terms including "anaphylaxis," "hypersensitivity," "allergy," "perioperative," and "intraoperative." Results from basic science literature, case reports, and clinical studies were used, as were personal communications with leading investigators in allergy and immunology., Results: Despite variations in incidence, reporting, evaluation, and management, the authors found that immediate treatment should include epinephrine, steroids, and histamine-1- and histamine-2-blocking agents. In the event of reactions with characteristics of anaphylaxis, obtaining tryptase levels 1, 4, and 24 hours after the event provides the most accurate biochemical evidence. Skin-prick and intradermal testing by an allergy specialist should be performed 6 or more weeks after the reaction., Conclusions: With the unique exposure risks in the perioperative period, it is the surgeon's responsibility to aid in the proper immediate and short-term treatment of anaphylaxis and anaphylactic-like reactions. Proper biochemical evaluation at the time of reaction can be critical in helping the patient avoid future reactions and should not be overlooked., Clinical Question/level of Evidence: Therapeutic, V.

Objective: Preference-sensitive surgical decisions merit shared decision-making, as decision engagement can reduce decisional conflict and regret. Elective cleft-related procedures are often preference sensitive, and therefore, we sought to better understand decision-making in this population. Design: Semistructured interviews were conducted to elicit qualitative data. A hierarchical codebook was developed through an iterative process in preparation for thematic analysis. Thematic analysis was performed to examine differences between patients and caregivers. Setting: Multidisciplinary cleft clinic at a tertiary care center. Participants: Patients with cleft lip aged 8 and older (n = 31) and their caregivers (n = 31) were purposively sampled. Inability to converse in English, intellectual disability, or syndromic diagnoses resulted in exclusion. Main Outcome Measures: Preferences surrounding surgical decision-making identified during thematic analysis. Results: Mean patient age was 12.7 (standard deviation: 3.1). Most had unilateral cleft lip and palate (43.8%). Three themes emerged: Insufficient Understanding of Facial Difference and Treatment, Diversity of Surgical Indications, and Barriers to Patient Autonomy. Almost half of caregivers believed their children understood their clefts, but most of these children failed to provide information about their cleft. Although many patients and caregivers acknowledged that surgery addressed function and/or appearance, patients and caregivers exhibited differences regarding the necessity of surgery. Furthermore, a large proportion of patients believed their opinions mattered in decisions, but less than half of caregivers agreed. Conclusions: Patients with clefts desire to participate in surgical decisions but have limited understanding of their facial difference and surgical indications. Cleft surgeons must educate patients and facilitate shared decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]