615
Views
29
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

Scandcleft randomised trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 6. Dental arch relationships in 5 year-olds

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , & show all
Pages 52-57 | Received 24 Mar 2016, Accepted 15 Jun 2016, Published online: 25 Oct 2016
 

Abstract

Background and aim: Good dentofacial growth is a major goal in the treatment of unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). The aim was to evaluate dental arch relationships at age 5 years after four different protocols of primary surgery for UCLP.

Design: Three parallel randomised clinical trials were undertaken as an international multi-centre study by 10 cleft teams in five countries: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and the UK.

Methods: Three different surgical procedures for primary palatal repair (Arms B, C, D) were tested against a common procedure (Arm A) in the total cohort of 448 children born with non-syndromic UCLP. Study models of 418 patients (273 boys) at the mean age of 5.1 years (range = 4.8–7.0) were available. Dental arch relationships were assessed using the 5-year index by a blinded panel of 16 orthodontists. Kappa statistics were calculated to assess reliability. The trials were tested statistically with t- and Chi-square tests.

Results: Good-to-very good levels of intra- and interrater reliability were obtained (0.71–0.94 and 0.70–0.87). Comparisons within each trial showed no statistically significant differences in the mean 5-year index scores or their distributions between the common method and the local team protocol. The mean index scores varied from 2.52 (Trial 2, Arm C) to 2.94 (Trial 3, Arm D).

Conclusion: The results of the three trials do not provide statistical evidence that one technique is better than the others. Further analysis of the possible influence of individual surgical skill and learning curve are being pursued in this dataset.

Trial registration: ISRCTN29932826.

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank professor Helen Worthington for statistical advice.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.