Search

Background: The FACE-Q Craniofacial Module is a patient-reported outcome measure designed for patients aged 8 to 29 years with conditions associated with a facial difference. In part 1, we describe the psychometric findings for the original CLEFT-Q scales tested in patients with cleft and noncleft facial conditions. The aim of this study was to examine psychometric performance of new FACE-Q Craniofacial Module scales., Methods: Data were collected between December 2016 and December 2019 from patients aged 8 to 29 years with conditions associated with a visible or functional facial difference. Rasch measurement theory (RMT) analysis was used to examine psychometric properties of each scale. Scores were transformed from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) for tests of construct validity., Results: 1495 participants were recruited with a broad range of conditions (e.g., birthmarks, facial paralysis, craniosynostosis, craniofacial microsomia, etc.) RMT analysis resulted in the refinement of 7 appearance scales (Birthmark, Cheeks, Chin, Eyes, Forehead, Head Shape, Smile), two function scales (Breathing, Facial), and an Appearance Distress scale. Person separation index and Cronbach alpha values met criteria. Three checklists were also formed (Eye Function, and Eye and Face Adverse Effects). Significantly lower scores on eight of nine scales were reported by participants whose appearance or functional difference was rated as a major rather than minor or no difference. Higher appearance distress correlated with lower appearance scale scores., Conclusion: The FACE-Q Craniofacial Module scales can be used to collect and compare patient reported outcomes data in children and young adults with a facial condition., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Anne Klassen and Karen Wong are co-developers of the patient-reported outcome scales described in this publication and share in any license revenues as royalties based on their institutions’ inventor sharing policy for their use in for-profit study. The other authors have no conflict of interest to declare in relation to this work., (Copyright © 2021 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The CLEFT-Q includes 12 independently functioning scales that measure appearance (face, nose, nostrils, teeth, lips, jaws), health-related quality of life (psychological, social, school, speech distress), and speech function, and an eating/drinking checklist. Previous qualitative research revealed that the CLEFT-Q has content validity in noncleft craniofacial conditions. This study aimed to examine the psychometric performance of the CLEFT-Q in an international sample of patients with a broad range of facial conditions., Methods: Data were collected between October 2016 and December 2019 from 2132 patients aged 8 to 29 years with noncleft facial conditions. Rasch measurement theory (RMT) analysis was used to examine Differential Item Function (DIF) by comparing the original CLEFT-Q sample and the new FACE-Q craniofacial sample. Reliability and validity of the scales in a combined cleft and craniofacial sample (n=4743) were examined., Results: DIF was found for 23 CLEFT-Q items when the datasets for the two samples were compared. When items with DIF were split by sample, correlations between the original and split person locations showed that DIF had negligible impact on scale scoring (correlations ≥0.995). In the combined sample, RMT analysis led to the retention of original content for ten CLEFT-Q scales, modification of the Teeth scale, and the addition of an Eating/Drinking scale. Data obtained fit with the Rasch model for 11 scales (exception School, p=0.04). Person Separation Index and Cronbach alpha values met the criteria., Conclusion: The scales described in this study can be used to measure outcomes in children and young adults with cleft and noncleft craniofacial conditions., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Statement Anne Klassen and Karen Wong are co-developers of the patient-reported outcome scales described in this publication and receive a share of any license revenues as royalties based on their institutions’ inventor sharing policy for their use in for-profit study. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare in relation to the content of this article., (Copyright © 2021 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Despite widespread concerns of radiotherapy toxicity in children with head and neck tumors, recent Children's Oncology Group (COG) findings suggest that the use of 45 Gy results in an unacceptably high rate of local recurrences in patients with low-risk orbital rhabdomyosarcoma. We therefore evaluated outcomes in our pediatric patients who received 45 GyRBE using proton therapy. Material and methods: To assess disease control and toxicity, we reviewed the medical records of 30 children (≤21 years old) with COG stage 1, group III embryonal orbital rhabdomyosarcoma enrolled on a prospective outcome study and treated with proton therapy between 2007 and 2018. Results: Median age at the time of radiation was 4.8 years old. Twenty-one and nine patients received ifosfamide- and cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy according to their respective cooperative group regimens. Median duration between the start of induction chemotherapy and radiation was 12 weeks. Two patients had a complete response to induction chemotherapy and two had stable disease. Twenty-six patients had a partial response to induction chemotherapy, with a median volume reduction of 66%. With a median follow-up of 4.0 years (range, 0.5-9.5 years), we observed 1 local failure 6 months following treatment in a patient who had a partial response to cyclosphophomide-based induction chemotherapy. The 5-year local control, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates were 97%, 97%, and 100%, respectively. Serious late toxicities included 18 patients with cataracts, 4 with exposure keratoconjunctivitis resulting in permanently reduced visual acuity, and 1 with chronic sinusitis. Conclusion: 45 GyRBE offers effective local control for most patients with group III orbital rhabdomyosarcoma. The delivery of proton therapy to the postinduction tumor volume plus a small margin can mitigate early- and intermediate-term toxicity, but side effects still occur and long-term data are needed to demonstrate the dosimetric advantage of proton therapy.