Lohmander Anette, Friede Hans, Elander Anna, Persson Christina, Lilja Jan
Departments of Speech Pathology, Sahlgrenska Academy at Göteborg University, Göteborg, Sweden.
Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 2006;40(5):267-74. doi: 10.1080/02844310600973621.
We wanted to find out if different timing of delayed repair of the hard palate in a two-stage procedure had an impact on the speech of 26 patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). The soft palate was closed at the age of 7 months and the hard palate between 38 and 89 months of age. Speech audio recordings at the age of 3 years (baseline, before any repair of the hard palate) and at the ages of 5, 7, and 10 years (the latter obtained at least one year after closure) were analysed. We used standardised speech assessments at routine follow-up and assessment by one external listener. The prevalence of speech errors caused by the cleft was similar to those described in previous reports from our centre in which hard palate repair was delayed. Unexpectedly, the results showed no difference in speech production related to timing of hard palate repair, except for nasal air leakage at the age of 7 years.
我们想了解在两阶段手术中，硬腭延迟修复的不同时机是否会对26名单侧唇腭裂（UCLP）患者的语音产生影响。软腭在7个月大时闭合，硬腭在38至89个月大时修复。分析了3岁（基线，硬腭修复前）、5岁、7岁和10岁（后者在闭合后至少一年获得）时的语音录音。我们在常规随访中使用标准化语音评估，并由一名外部听众进行评估。腭裂导致的语音错误发生率与我们中心之前关于硬腭修复延迟的报告中描述的相似。出乎意料的是，结果显示，除了7岁时的鼻漏气外，与硬腭修复时机相关的语音产生没有差异。
