Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Oral Health in Children With Cleft Lip and Palate

Objective: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) exist to present recommendations and policies aimed at optimizing the oral health of children and adolescents born with cleft lip and/or palate. The aim of this review is to identify and assess the scope, quality, adequacy, and consistency of CPGs relat...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal 2022-06, Vol.59 (6), p.800-814
Main Authors: Saikia, Ankita, Muthu, M.S., Orenuga, Omolola O., Mossey, Peter, Ousehal, Lahcen, Yan, Si, Campodonico, Marina, England, Rachael, Taylor, Sean, Sheeran, Pamela
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adolescent
Birth defects
Child
Children & youth
Childrens health
Cleft Lip - therapy
Cleft Palate - therapy
Clinical medicine
Clinical practice guidelines
Data Collection
Humans
Oral Health
Oral hygiene
Original
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Systematic review
Teenagers
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) exist to present recommendations and policies aimed at optimizing the oral health of children and adolescents born with cleft lip and/or palate. The aim of this review is to identify and assess the scope, quality, adequacy, and consistency of CPGs related to oral health in children and adolescents with clefts, along with reporting any differences and shortcomings. Methods: A systematic review of the literature of CPGs following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines was conducted. Assessment of selected CPGs was performed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II methodological quality instrument. Results: Only 7 CPGs fulfilled the criteria. Of these, 4 were from the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association, and 1 each from the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine, and the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. The lowest overall mean scores were in the domain “Rigor of Development” (mean 29.58%, SD 17.11), revealing lower quality in methodology of the guideline. The domain “Clarity of Presentation” (mean 73.80%, SD 7.87) revealed the best score. Conclusions: Our review results reveal a lack of integrated high-quality CPGs that can be used as universal guidelines by health workers in a range of disciplines for improving oral health in children and adolescents with cleft problems.
ISSN:1055-6656
1545-1569
1545-1569
DOI:10.1177/10556656211025189