Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Treatment of Patients with Cleft Lip, Alveolus, and Palate: An Executive Summary

Significant treatment variation exists in the Netherlands between teams treating patients with cleft lip, alveolus, and/or palate, resulting in a confusing and undesirable situation for patients, parents, and practitioners. Therefore, to optimize cleft care, clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) were...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aebele B. Mink van der Molen, Johanna M. M. van Breugel, Nard G. Janssen, Ronald J. C. Admiraal, Leon N. A. van Adrichem, Frank Bierenbroodspot, Dirk Bittermann, Marie-José H. van den Boogaard, Pieter H. Broos, Janet J. M. Dijkstra-Putkamer, Martine C. M. van Gemert-Schriks, Andrea L. J. Kortlever, Chantal M. Mouës-Vink, Henriette F. N. Swanenburg de Veye, Nanouk van Tol-Verbeek, Christl Vermeij-Keers, Hester de Wilde, Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: MDPI AG 2021
Materias:
R
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/771df64434cb48bbb9694c42cda4c4bf
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
Descripción
Sumario:Significant treatment variation exists in the Netherlands between teams treating patients with cleft lip, alveolus, and/or palate, resulting in a confusing and undesirable situation for patients, parents, and practitioners. Therefore, to optimize cleft care, clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) were developed. The aim of this report is to describe CPG development, share the main recommendations, and indicate knowledge gaps regarding cleft care. Together with patients and parents, a multidisciplinary working group of representatives from all relevant disciplines assisted by two experienced epidemiologists identified the topics to be addressed in the CPGs. Searching the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases identified 5157 articles, 60 of which remained after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. We rated the quality of the evidence from moderate to very low. The working group formulated 71 recommendations regarding genetic testing, feeding, lip and palate closure, hearing, hypernasality, bone grafting, orthodontics, psychosocial guidance, dentistry, osteotomy versus distraction, and rhinoplasty. The final CPGs were obtained after review by all stakeholders and allow cleft teams to base their treatment on current knowledge. With high-quality evidence lacking, the need for additional high-quality studies has become apparent.