The Cleft Care UK study. Part 4: perceptual speech outcomes

Authors

  • D. Sell,

    1. Speech and Language Therapy Department and Centre for Outcomes and Experience Research in Children's Health, Illness and Disability (ORCHID), Great Ormond Street Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
    Search for more papers by this author
  • S. Mildinhall,

    1. Previously South Thames Cleft Service, Guys and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust Hospital, London, UK
    Search for more papers by this author
  • L. Albery,

    1. University Hospitals Bristol NHS Trust, Cleft Lip and Palate Team, Bristol, UK
    Search for more papers by this author
  • A. K. Wills,

    1. School of Oral and Dental Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
    Search for more papers by this author
  • J. R. Sandy,

    Corresponding author
    1. School of Oral and Dental Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
    • Prof J. Sandy

      School of Oral and Dental Sciences

      University of Bristol

      Lower Maudlin Street

      Bristol, BS1 2LY

      UK

      E-mail: Jonathan.Sandy@bris.ac.uk

    Search for more papers by this author
  • A. R. Ness

    1. School of Oral and Dental Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
    2. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Unit in Nutrition, Diet and Lifestyle at the University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
    Search for more papers by this author

Structured Abstract

Objectives

To describe the perceptual speech outcomes from the Cleft Care UK (CCUK) study and compare them to the 1998 Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG) audit.

Setting and sample population

A cross-sectional study of 248 children born with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate, between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2007 who underwent speech assessment.

Materials and methods

Centre-based specialist speech and language therapists (SLT) took speech audio–video recordings according to nationally agreed guidelines. Two independent listeners undertook the perceptual analysis using the CAPS-A Audit tool. Intra- and inter-rater reliability were tested.

Results

For each speech parameter of intelligibility/distinctiveness, hypernasality, palatal/palatalization, backed to velar/uvular, glottal, weak and nasalized consonants, and nasal realizations, there was strong evidence that speech outcomes were better in the CCUK children compared to CSAG children. The parameters which did not show improvement were nasal emission, nasal turbulence, hyponasality and lateral/lateralization.

Conclusion

These results suggest that centralization of cleft care into high volume centres has resulted in improvements in UK speech outcomes in five-year-olds with unilateral cleft lip and palate. This may be associated with the development of a specialized workforce. Nevertheless, there still remains a group of children with significant difficulties at school entry.

Ancillary