Abstract

Compare 5-year-old dental arch relationships of patients from three centers with differing primary protocols. Retrospective study of treatment outcomes using blinded evaluation of dental study casts. Three major cleft-craniofacial centers; one (center A) is a free-standing institution, and two (centers B and C) are university hospitals. 118 (A = 41; B = 33; C = 44) consecutively treated 5-year-old patients with complete, nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate. Centers A and C completed primary repair without presurgical orthopedics by 18 months (center A in three surgeries and center C in two surgeries). Center B used passive presurgical orthopedics with lip/soft palate repair at 6 months and gingivo-alveoloplasty/hard palate repair at 18 to 36 months. Averaged ratings of dental casts using the 5-year yardstick were computed for each patient. The Wilcoxon two-sample test was used to compare means; a chi-square test was used to compare distributions. Intra- and interexaminer reliability tests showed excellent reliability (>.90). Mean scores were not significantly different. Distribution of scores differed significantly. Center A had the highest percentage of good scores and the lowest percentage of poor scores (72% versus 6.5%), followed by center B (63% versus 6.6%) and center C (59% versus 16.3%). Centers A and B had comparable scores and completely different protocols in surgical technique, timing, sequencing, and nonuse/use of appliances. Center C's results were slightly lower than those of 1 and 3, but the center had the protocol with the least burden of treatment (only two surgeries, without use of appliances).

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.