1. |
- Breugem, Corstiaan, et al.
(author)
-
Prioritizing Cleft/Craniofacial Surgical Care after the COVID-19 Pandemic
- 2020
-
In: PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN. - 2169-7574. ; 8:9
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: It is anticipated that in due course the burden of emergency care due to COVID-19 infected patients will reduce sufficiently to permit elective surgical procedures to recommence. Prioritizing cleft/craniofacial surgery in the already overloaded medical system will then become an issue. The European Cleft Palate Craniofacial Association, together with the European Cleft and Craniofacial Initiative for Equality in Care, performed a brief survey to capture a current snapshot during a rapidly evolving pandemic. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to the 2242 participants who attended 1 of 3 recent international cleft/craniofacial meetings. Results: The respondents indicated that children with Robin sequence who were not responding to nonsurgical options should be treated as emergency cases. Over 70% of the respondents indicated that palate repair should be performed before the age of 15 months, an additional 22% stating the same be performed by 18 months. Placement of middle ear tubes, primary cleft lip surgery, alveolar bone grafting, and velopharyngeal insufficiency surgery also need prioritization. Children with craniofacial conditions such as craniosynostosis and increased intracranial pressure need immediate care, whilst children with craniosynostosis and associated obstructive sleep apnea syndrome or proptosis need surgical care within 3 months of the typical timing. Craniosynostosis without signs of increased intracranial pressure needs correction before the age of 18 months. Conclusions: This survey indicates several areas of cleft and craniofacial conditions that need prioritization, but also certain areas where intervention is less urgent. We acknowledge that there will be differences in the post COVID-19 response according to circumstances and policies in individual countries.
|
|
2. |
- Breugem, Corstiaan, et al.
(author)
-
Prioritizing Cleft/Craniofacial Surgical Care after the COVID-19 Pandemic
- 2020
-
In: PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN. - 2169-7574. ; 8:9
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: It is anticipated that in due course the burden of emergency care due to COVID-19 infected patients will reduce sufficiently to permit elective surgical procedures to recommence. Prioritizing cleft/craniofacial surgery in the already overloaded medical system will then become an issue. The European Cleft Palate Craniofacial Association, together with the European Cleft and Craniofacial Initiative for Equality in Care, performed a brief survey to capture a current snapshot during a rapidly evolving pandemic. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to the 2242 participants who attended 1 of 3 recent international cleft/craniofacial meetings. Results: The respondents indicated that children with Robin sequence who were not responding to nonsurgical options should be treated as emergency cases. Over 70% of the respondents indicated that palate repair should be performed before the age of 15 months, an additional 22% stating the same be performed by 18 months. Placement of middle ear tubes, primary cleft lipsurgery, alveolar bone grafting, and velopharyngeal insufficiency surgery also need prioritization. Children with craniofacial conditions such as craniosynostosis and increased intracranial pressure need immediate care, whilst children with craniosynostosis and associated obstructive sleep apnea syndrome or proptosis need surgical care within 3 months of the typical timing. Craniosynostosis without signs of increased intracranial pressure needs correction before the age of 18 months. Conclusions: This survey indicates several areas of cleft and craniofacial conditions that need prioritization, but also certain areas where intervention is less urgent. We acknowledge that there will be differences in the post COVID-19 response according to circumstances and policies in individual countries.
|
|
3. |
- Mossey, Peter A, et al.
(author)
-
Core outcomes for orofacial clefts : reconciling traditional and ICHOM minimum datasets
- 2023
-
In: European Journal of Orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press. - 0141-5387 .- 1460-2210. ; 45:6, s. 671-679
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVE/DESIGN/SETTING: This retrospective study sought voluntary participation from leading cleft centres from Europe and Brazil regarding core outcome measures. The results of this study would inform the debate on core outcome consensus pertaining to the European Reference Network for rare diseases (ERN CRANIO) and achieve a core outcome set for cleft care providers worldwide. INTERVENTION/METHOD: Five orofacial cleft (OFC) disciplines were identified, within which all of the International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) outcomes fall. One questionnaire was designed for each discipline and comprised 1. the relevant ICHOM's outcomes within that discipline, and 2. a series of questions targeted to clinicians. What core outcomes are currently measured and when, did these align with the ICHOM minimum, if not how did they differ, and would they recommend modified or additional outcomes?. RESULTS: For some disciplines participants agreed with the ICHOM minimums but urged for earlier and morefrequent intervention. Some clinicians felt that some of the ICHOM standards were compatible but that different ages were preferred and for others the ICHOM standards were acceptable but developmental stages should be preferred to absolute time points. CONCLUSION/IMPLICATIONS: Core outcomes for OFC were supported in principle but there are differences between the ICHOM recommendations and the 2002 WHO global consensus. The latter are established in many centres with historical archives of OFC outcome data, and it was concluded that with some modifications ICHOM could be moulded into useful core outcomes data for inter-centre comparisons worldwide.
|
|