Shaw W C, Dahl E, Asher-McDade C, Brattström V, Mars M, McWilliam J, Mølsted K, Plint D A, Prahl-Andersen B, Roberts C
Division of Dentistry, Childrens Hospital, Los Angeles, California 90027.
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1992 Sep;29(5):413-8. doi: 10.1597/1545-1569_1992_029_0413_asciso_2.3.co_2.
Part 5 is the final part of a series of five articles reporting on an international, multicenter clinical audit of treatment outcome for complete UCLP. A number of recommendations for the methodology of future studies is made especially with respect to entry criteria, sample size, assumptions of homogeneity, and the reproducibility and validity of outcome measures. The findings of the present study regarding clinical procedures are presented tentatively, and improvement and extension of the methodology are required. It appears, however, that acceptable results can be achieved by different programs and ultimately clinical choices may be based on factors such as complexity, costs, and demands of treatment. Standardization, centralization, and the participation of high volume operators were associated with good outcomes, and nonstandardization and the participation of low volume operators with poor outcomes. Therapeutic factors associated with good outcomes were the employment of a vomer flap to close the anterior palate, and poor outcomes with primary bone grafting and with active presurgical orthopedics.
