The Use of Spanish Language Educational Materials by American Cleft Palate–Craniofacial Association Teams

Edwards, Paul D.; Bonilla, Zobeida E.

doi:10.1597/03-019.1

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In a second study, Edward and Bonilla (2004) examined team-oriented care for Spanish-speaking children/families with orofacial clefts (Edwards and Bonilla, 2004). They found that 10% of the responding teams treated 26% to 56% of Spanish-speaking patients.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Team-Oriented Care for Orofacial Clefts: A Review of the Literature

McGrattan

Ellis

2013

The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective : To examine the process of team-oriented care for children with orofacial clefts. Design : Systematic review of available studies reporting team-oriented management of children and adults with orofacial clefts. We identified studies from OVID, PsychINFO, REHABDATA, PubMed, and The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal to complete this review. Main Outcome Measures : Process of team-oriented treatment, which included use of team-oriented care, continuity of team-oriented care, and approaches to team-oriented care. Results : We identified nine studies including 1398 participants. We found that studies examining team-oriented approaches to orofacial clefts were limited. Studies of orofacial teams suggest that use of team-oriented approaches to care are highly variable. It is unclear how these inconsistencies in approaches to care influence long-term outcomes. Conclusions : Although the literature suggests that the process of team-oriented care results in better outcomes in individuals with orofacial clefts, process of care as a measurable outcome has yet to be adequately examined. Future studies are needed to investigate the impact on clinical outcomes and their relationship to cost effectiveness and efficiency of care.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Team-Oriented Care for Orofacial Clefts: A Review of the Literature

McGrattan

Ellis

2013

The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Coordination between surgeons and other providers including pediatrics may need to be streamlined for both syndromic patients and patients with government insurance. With respect to gender, ethnicity, race, and language barriers, cleft care teams should use Spanish-specific language messaging and conduct outreach initiatives, which have been shown to increase local community education and empower families to seek care (Edwards & Bonilla, 2004). Other studies suggest that delayed cleft surgery may relate to cultural differences, mistrust of medical providers, financial inability to pay, or caregiver characteristics, which are not captured by the present study (Massenburg et al, 2016; Yao et al, 2016; Bennett et al, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors Associated With Delay in Cleft Surgery at a Tertiary Children’s Hospital in a Major US Metropolitan City

Stoneburner

Munabi

Nagengast

et al. 2021

The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To identify factors associated with late cleft repair at a US tertiary children’s hospital. Design: Retrospective study of children with CL/P using Children’s Hospital Los Angeles (CHLA) records. Setting: US tertiary children’s hospital. Patients/Participants: Patients undergoing primary CL or CP repair at CHLA from 2009 to 2018. Main Outcome Measures: Proportion of children who had delayed primary CL repair or CP repair using CHLA and American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association (ACPA) guidelines and factors associated with late surgery. Results: In total, 805 patients—503 (62.5%) who had CL repair, 302 (37.5%) CP repair—were included. Using CHLA protocol, 14.3% of patients seeking CL repair had delayed surgery. Delay was significantly associated with female gender, non-Hispanic ethnicity, Spanish primary language, government insurance, bilateral cleft, cleft lip and palate (CLP), and syndromic diagnosis. Using ACPA guidelines, 5.4% had delayed surgery. Female gender and syndromic diagnosis were significantly associated with delay and remained significant after adjustment for confounders in multivariate models. For CP repair, 60.3% of patients had delayed surgery using CHLA protocol. Cleft lip and palate diagnosis, complete cleft, syndromic diagnosis, and longer travel distance were significantly associated with delay. Using ACPA guidelines, 28.5% had delayed surgery; however, significant association with patient variables was not consistently observed. Conclusions: Delay in cleft surgery occurs most often for patients seeking CP repair and is associated with female gender, non-Hispanic ethnicity, Spanish language, government insurance, and bilateral CL, CLP, or syndromic diagnoses. Initiatives should aim to optimize cleft surgery delivery for these subpopulations.

show abstract

“…Thus, it is not uncommon for members of cleft palate teams to encounter patients who speak primarily Spanish while many team members do not. In 2004, Edwards and Bonilla [2] reported survey results showing that Spanish speakers represented at least 25% of the patients seen by 16% of the responding cleft palate teams.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and Validity of Nasality Ratings between a Monolingual and Bilingual Listener for Speech Samples from English-Spanish-Speaking Children

Watterson

Lewis

Murdock

et al. 2013

Folia Phoniatr Logop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study sought to determine if a monolingual English listener could rate nasality in English and in Spanish with the same proficiency as a bilingual English-Spanish listener, and to compare nasalance scores with nasality ratings. Patients and Methods: Speakers for this study were 26 bilingual English-Spanish-speaking children. Speech samples and nasalance scores were obtained simultaneously as each speaker recited one English sentence and one Spanish sentence. A monolingual listener and a bilingual listener rated nasality. Results: For the English sentences, the intrajudge correlation coefficient was r = 0.89 for the monolingual listener and r = 0.89 for the bilingual listener. For the Spanish sentences, the intrajudge correlation coefficient was r = 0.91 for the monolingual listener and r = 0.92 for the bilingual listener. Interjudge agreement was r = 0.86 for rating English sentences and r = 0.78 for rating Spanish sentences. All correlation coefficients were significant (p < 0.001). The correlation coefficients between nasality ratings and nasalance scores were essentially the same for both listeners and both languages. Conclusion: A monolingual and a bilingual judge had high agreement on ratings of nasality for English and Spanish speech. The relationship between nasalance and nasality was not different across languages.

show abstract

The Use of Spanish Language Educational Materials by American Cleft Palate–Craniofacial Association Teams

Cited by 9 publications

References 30 publications

Team-Oriented Care for Orofacial Clefts: A Review of the Literature

Team-Oriented Care for Orofacial Clefts: A Review of the Literature

Factors Associated With Delay in Cleft Surgery at a Tertiary Children’s Hospital in a Major US Metropolitan City

Reliability and Validity of Nasality Ratings between a Monolingual and Bilingual Listener for Speech Samples from English-Spanish-Speaking Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About