Multiple oppositions intervention: effective phonological treatment of two children with cleft lip and palate and severe speech sound disorder.

The purpose of this study was to investigate if multiple oppositions intervention (MOI) generated widespread change in the phonological systems of two children with cleft lip and palate (CLP) and severe speech sound disorders (SSD). We treated two children (ages 5;4 and 5;6) with CLP and severe SSD using MOI for 24 and 29 sessions. We measured the percentage consonants correct (PCC) for target consonants and untreated consonants in non-treatment single words, as well as PCC for connected speech. Data points were collected in the baseline, intervention, and maintenance phase with post-tests conducted immediately after intervention and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Two speech and language therapists (SLTs) unfamiliar with the children performed phonetic transcriptions, and we calculated intra- and inter-rater agreement. We graphed the data, and used permutation tests to analyse the probability that the observed increases in PCC were due to random chance. Both children experienced considerable improvements in PCC across all measures at the first post-test, supporting the impact of MOI on their entire phonological system. The PCC continued to increase during the maintenance phase. By the final post-test, the PCC in connected speech exceeded 90% for both children, reducing their SSD classification to mild. Our findings support that a phonological, contrastive intervention approach targeting multiple consonants simultaneously can create system-wide phonological change for children with CLP and severe SSD. Further research with more participants is needed to strengthen these findings.

Influence of timing of delayed hard palate closure on articulation skills in 3-year-old Danish children with unilateral cleft lip and palate.

BACKGROUND: Differing results regarding articulation skills in young children with cleft palate (CP) have been reported and often interpreted as a consequence of different surgical protocols. AIMS: To assess the influence of different timing of hard palate closure in a two-stage procedure on articulation skills in 3-year-olds born with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Secondary aims were to compare results with peers without CP, and to investigate if there are gender differences in articulation skills. Furthermore, burden of treatment was to be estimated in terms of secondary surgery, hearing and speech therapy. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A randomized controlled trial (RCT). Early hard palate closure (EHPC) at 12 months versus late hard palate closure (LHPC) at 36 months in a two-stage procedure was tested in a cohort of 126 Danish-speaking children born with non-syndromic UCLP. All participants had the lip and soft palate closed around 4 months of age. Audio and video recordings of a naming test were available from 113 children (32 girls and 81 boys) and were transcribed phonetically. Recordings were obtained prior to hard palate closure in the LHPC group. The main outcome measures were percentage consonants correct adjusted (PCC-A) and consonant errors from blinded assessments. Results from 36 Danish-speaking children without CP obtained previously by Willadsen in 2012 were used for comparison. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Children with EHPC produced significantly more target consonants correctly (83%) than children with LHPC (48%; p < .001). In addition, children with LHPC produced significantly more active cleft speech characteristics than children with EHPC (p < .001). Boys achieved significantly lower PCC-A scores than girls (p = .04) and produced significantly more consonant errors than girls (p = .02). No significant differences were found between groups regarding burden of treatment. The control group performed significantly better than the EHPC and LHPC groups on all compared variables.

Scandcleft randomised trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 5. Speech outcomes in 5-year-olds - consonant proficiency and errors.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Normal articulation before school start is a main objective in cleft palate treatment. The aim was to investigate if differences exist in consonant proficiency at age 5 years between children with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) randomised to different surgical protocols for primary palatal repair. A secondary aim was to estimate burden of care in terms of received additional secondary surgeries and speech therapy. DESIGN: Three parallel group, randomised clinical trials were undertaken as an international multicentre study by 10 cleft teams in five countries: Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden, and the UK. METHODS: Three different surgical protocols for primary palatal repair were tested against a common procedure in the total cohort of 448 children born with non-syndromic UCLP. Speech audio- and video-recordings of 391 children (136 girls and 255 boys) were available and transcribed phonetically. The main outcome measure was Percent Consonants Correct (PCC) from blinded assessments. RESULTS: In Trial 1, arm A showed statistically significant higher PCC scores (82%) than arm B (78%) (p = .045). No significant differences were found between prevalences in Trial 2, A: 79%, C: 82%; or Trial 3, A: 80%, D: 85%. Across all trials, girls achieved better PCC scores, excluding s-errors, than boys (91.0% and 87.5%, respectively) (p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: PCC scores were higher in arm A than B in Trial 1, whereas no differences were found between arms in Trials 2 or 3. The burden of care in terms of secondary pharyngeal surgeries, number of fistulae, and speech therapy visits differed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN29932826.

A Scandcleft randomised trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 1. Planning and management.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Longstanding uncertainty surrounds the selection of surgical protocols for the closure of unilateral cleft lip and palate, and randomised trials have only rarely been performed. This paper is an introduction to three randomised trials of primary surgery for children born with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). It presents the protocol developed for the trials in CONSORT format, and describes the management structure that was developed to achieve the long-term engagement and commitment required to complete the project. METHOD: Ten established national or regional cleft centres participated. Lip and soft palate closure at 3-4 months, and hard palate closure at 12 months served as a common method in each trial. Trial 1 compared this with hard palate closure at 36 months. Trial 2 compared it with lip closure at 3-4 months and hard and soft palate closure at 12 months. Trial 3 compared it with lip and hard palate closure at 3-4 months and soft palate closure at 12 months. The primary outcomes were speech and dentofacial development, with a series of perioperative and longer-term secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Recruitment of 448 infants took place over a 9-year period, with 99.8% subsequent retention at 5 years. CONCLUSION: The series of reports that follow this introductory paper include comparisons at age 5 of surgical outcomes, speech outcomes, measures of dentofacial development and appearance, and parental satisfaction. The outcomes recorded and the numbers analysed for each outcome and time point are described in the series. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN29932826.