Cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) are among the most common of all birth defects. Habilitation requires multiple surgeries and other therapies throughout childhood and adolescence. While multidisciplinary care is recommended, there is a great deal of variation in treatment protocols for this condition. There is ample evidence that children with CL/P are at risk for psychosocial problems. However, to date, few studies have systematically investigated parent and patient self-reported psychosocial and quality of life (QOL) outcomes for children with CL/P as they relate to variations in treatment protocols. The Americleft Outcomes project was initiated to demonstrate and document outcomes to be expected with team care, and to define the key features or characteristics of various team treatment protocols and procedures that are associated with more or less favorable/desirable outcomes. This article will describe the psychosocial component of the Americleft Outcomes project that is aimed at developing a protocol that will allow cross team assessment of psychosocial outcomes for children with CL/P in relationship to the treatments they received. The protocol will be detailed along with a description of the process and considerations that were instrumental in the development of the project. Stakeholder input about the project’s perceived relevance to families of children with CL/P will be reported. The paper concludes with a discussion of the challenges encountered with this project, clinical implications, and future directions.

Bullying is a common child and adolescent phenomenon that has concurrent and long-term implications for victims' psychological, psychosomatic, social, and academic functioning. Youth with chronic illnesses are at increased risk for being bullied, but few studies have evaluated specific risk and protective factors for medically fragile youth. Despite recommendations by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Society for Adolescent Medicine that pediatric health care providers should contribute to bullying prevention and intervention efforts, researchers also have yet to identify the best ways for providers to intervene with medically fragile youth. In this article, the authors review risk and protective factors for bullying among healthy samples. Then, the authors specifically address the ways in which these risk and protective factors are likely to apply to children with fragile medical conditions, and they provide summaries of extant bullying research for selected examples of medically fragile pediatric populations. Finally, the authors present recommendations for intervening with medically fragile youth and suggest several areas in which additional research is needed.

No abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate possible relationships between number of surgeries and parent ratings of academic functioning among children with isolated oral clefts. Design: Multicenter, retrospective cohort study including structured interviews, questionnaires, and chart reviews. Setting: Completion of questionnaires occurred during clinical visits at 6 different cleft centers across North America. Participants: Parents of 285 children with isolated clefts of the lip and/or palate, aged 8 to 10 years old, participated in structured interviews and completed questionnaires regarding the academic and behavioral functioning of their children. Main Outcome Measures: Parent interview and medical chart review of number of surgeries to date and parent ratings on the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System, Third Edition-Functional Academics Scale (ABAS-FA) and Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) Total Competency Scale. Results: Parent ratings of ABAS-FA were at or above normative expectations, while ratings across CBCL Competency Scales were lower than normative expectations. Socioeconomic status (SES), age, and race were consistent predictors of parent ratings (higher SES, older age, and Caucasian race were associated with better functioning). Number of surgeries did not add significantly to academic ratings but did significantly contribute to ratings of social and activity participation. Patients with more surgeries were rated with lower functioning in these domains. Conclusions: Findings do not support a connection between number of surgeries and later ratings of academic functioning but do support a connection to social and activity involvement. Recommendations for conducting direct studies of the connection between surgeries and academic functioning as well as clinical considerations for surgeries and impact on social and activity involvement are discussed.

Objective To determine associations of demographic, morphologic, and treatment protocol parameters with quality of life (QoL), appearance/speech satisfaction, and psychological adjustment. Design Observational study utilizing retrospective report of protocol variables and current outcome variables. Setting Six North American cleft treatment clinics. Participants Children, ages 8.0–10.99 years, with Cleft Lip ± Alveolus, Cleft Palate, Cleft Lip and Palate, and parents (N = 284). Outcome Measures Pediatric QoL Inventory (PedsQL): Parent, Child, Family Impact Module (FIM); Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS); Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL); CLEFT-Q. Results Outcome scores were average with few differences by cleft type. Multiple regression analyses yielded significant associations ( Ps < .05) between socioeconomic status, race, and age at assessment and parent- and self-reported measures. Females had higher PROMIS Depression (β=.20) but lower CBCL Affective (β = −.16) and PROMIS Stigma scores (β= −.24). Incomplete cleft lip was associated with lower PROMIS Depression, and more positive ratings of CLEFT-Q: Nose, Nostril, Lip Scar; CBCL Competence scores, (βs = −.17 to .17). Younger Age at Lip Closure was associated with higher CBCL School Competence (β= −.18). Younger Age at Palate Closure was associated with higher Child PedsQL Total, Physical, Psychosocial QoL, and better CLEFT-Q Speech Function (βs = −.18 to −.15). Furlow Palatoplasty was associated with more CBCL Externalizing Problems (β = .17) higher CBCL Activities (β = .16). For all diagnoses, fewer Total Cleft-Related Surgeries was associated with lower PROMIS Stigma and higher CBCL Total Competence and Activities (βs = −.16 to .15). Conclusions Demographic characteristics, lip morphology, and treatment variables are related to later psychological functioning.

The Craniofacial Special Interest Group (SIG) of the Society of Pediatric Psychology was established in 2012 to build connections between mental health care professionals and facilitate communication among providers who care for children with craniofacial diagnoses (e.g., cleft lip and/or palate, craniosynostosis) and their families. There are currently 35 Craniofacial SIG members. Meetings are held annually to discuss current issues in the field and receive updates on projects from two committees. The Evidence Based Practice Committee provides fact sheets and resources to professionals providing care to families ("Assessment

This observational, multisite cohort study explored health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in children with cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P), including interrater agreement and ratings for this group relative to clinical cutoff scores and published means for healthy and chronically ill children. Participants (338 children ages 8-10 years, 45.9% male and their parents, 82.0% female) across 6 sites completed the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Generic Core Scales (PedsQL). Intraclass correlation revealed poor interrater agreement for most HRQoL domains. Although ratings were generally higher than those expected for children with a chronic illness, child ratings were below healthy means for school functioning, and parent proxy ratings were below healthy means for all domains except physical functioning. Lower ratings consistent with chronic illness means were found for self-reported emotional and psychosocial functioning in children with cleft lip and palate (CLP), as well as parent proxy-reported emotional, school, and psychosocial functioning for children with cleft palate (CP). Scores were most likely to be in the clinical range for children with CP for social, school, and total functioning. Although parent proxy report provides important information about observed functioning, poor interrater agreement indicates that both child and parent proxy reported HRQoL should be included in outcomes assessment for CL/P. HRQoL ratings may be higher for children with CL/P compared to youth with other chronic illnesses, but psychosocial functioning may be negatively impacted when compared with healthy youth, particularly for emotional, social, and school functioning in children with CLP or CP.

This study evaluated the effectiveness of academic screening measures in relation to parent-reported diagnoses. Multicenter, retrospective cohort study including structured interviews, questionnaires, and chart reviews. Six North American cleft centers. Children (n = 391) with cleft lip and/or palate, ages 8 to 10 years of age (192 male) and their guardians were recruited during regular clinic visits. Parent and child ratings on the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) School Scale, child report on CleftQ School Scale, parent report on the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System-Third Edition Functional Academics (ABAS-FA) Scale and Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) School Competency Scale, parent interview, and medical chart review. Risk for concerns ranged from 12% to 41%, with higher risk reflected on the CBCL-SC compared to other measures. Males with cleft palate were consistently at the highest risk. Only 9% of the sample had a parent-reported diagnosis of a learning or language disability. Ratings from the ABAS-FA and CBCL-SC had the highest utility in identifying those with language and/or learning concerns. As cleft teams work to develop standardized batteries for screening and monitoring of patients, it is important to evaluate the effectiveness of measures in identifying those at highest risk. When screening for language and learning disorders, questions related to potential academic struggles, such as increased school effort or increased school distress, are most useful. Referrals for follow-up evaluation are recommended for those identified at high risk.