What the patients and parents do not tell you-recollections from families following external LeFort III midface distraction

Multidisciplinary Presurgical Education: Clinical Impact on Children With Orofacial Clefts Undergoing Maxillary Distraction via Rigid External Distraction

OBJECTIVE

Treatment of severe maxillary hypoplasia is commonly addressed via distraction osteogenesis with a rigid external device (RED). While effective, this method can be socially stigmatizing in an already vulnerable patient population. To prepare children and their caregivers for life with a RED and decrease peri-operative anxiety, we instituted a multidisciplinary pre-surgical education session (MPES). This educational team involves our cleft care coordinator, child life specialist, orthodontist and plastic surgeon 2 weeks prior to surgery. We reviewed the impact of this intervention by examining clinical outcomes before and after its implementation.

DESIGN

From February 2017 to February 2020, a retrospective chart review was performed to include patients with orofacial clefts and maxillary hypoplasia who underwent maxillary distraction osteogenesis with RED at our center before (28 patients) and after (29 patients) the implementation of MPES.

RESULTS

MPES was associated with a significantly shorter length of stay compared to controls who did not receive MPES (3.6 vs 3.1 days, p < 0.03) and significantly decreased usage of inpatient narcotic pain medication compared to controls (16.8 morphine equivalents vs 31.8 morphine equivalents, p < 0.02). Our intervention also demonstrated a trend towards decrease in minor complications but did not achieve statistical significance p = 0.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary presurgical education is a beneficial adjunct in the care of patients with orofacial clefts and maxillary hypoplasia undergoing maxillary advancement with a RED.

Craniosynostosis: Le Fort III Distraction Osteogenesis

The Le Fort III advancement was first described in 1950 and has since become a key technique in the armamentarium of craniofacial surgeons. The application of distraction osteogenesis to the craniofacial skeleton has allowed for large movements to be performed safely in young patients. This technique is valuable for correcting exorbitism, airway obstruction owing to midface retrusion, and class III malocclusion. It can be performed with either an external distractor or internal distractors. Although serious complications have been reported, these occur rarely when performed by experienced providers.

Evaluation of parental and surgeon stressors and perceptions of distraction osteogenesis in pediatric craniofacial patients: a cross-sectional survey study

PURPOSE

There is a paucity of literature on how limitations of distraction osteogenesis (DO) are perceived by physicians and parents of pediatric patients. Specifically understanding which features of DO are most concerning to these two groups may better inform parent education, as well as direct improvements in distraction protocols and devices.

METHOD

Parents/guardians of patients (between January 2016 and October 2017) being treated with craniofacial distraction were recruited to complete a survey regarding level of stress (1 = not stressful, 9 = maximally stressful) associated with eight features of DO. Craniofacial surgeons completed a survey asking them to report (1) their personal level of stress and (2) their perceptions of parental stress regarding these same eight features of DO.

RESULTS

Thirty-five parents and 15 craniofacial surgeons completed the survey. The risk of the device getting infected was perceived as most stressful by parents (5.5 ± 2.3) followed by the device sticking through the skin (4.9 ± 2.6) and the second operation for removal (4.7 ± 2.3). These same three features also elicited the highest level of stress among surgeons. Surgeon-perceived parental stress regarding turning of the distractor (5.8 ± 1.5) was significantly higher than parent self-reported stress (4.2 ± 2.8, p = 0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

Both parents and surgeons perceive risk of device-associated infection, the protrusion of the device through the skin, and the requirement of a second operation for removal as the most stressful drawbacks of distraction. Infection reduction protocols, less obtrusive devices, and devices that do not require removal are potential targets for stress reduction.

Using Photovoice to Explore Quality of Life Factors of Adults With Crouzon Syndrome

In the United States, one in 60,000 adults live with Crouzon Syndrome (CS) and facial malformations. Phenomenological studies about their lived experiences and quality of life are lacking. The purpose of this participatory action research study was to gain a richer understanding of the perceived biopsychosocial and socioecological factors that impact quality of life for adults living with CS using Photovoice. Another aim was to develop a conceptual framework of quality of life for those experiencing CS to enhance tailored health education and services. A purposeful sample of nine adults with CS were recruited from U.S. national surgery centers and support groups. Participants used photography to represent their experiences and participated in individual interviews and focus groups. Data were analyzed with the participants using thematic analysis, and 44 themes emerged which informed the development of a quality of life conceptual framework and action plan described in this article.

Family-centred care during midface advancement with a rigid external device: what do families need?

Midface advancement with distraction osteogenesis using the rigid external device (RED) is an effective but invasive treatment to correct the hypoplastic midface. This study draws up an inventory of the stressors, needs and coping strategies of families during this treatment, to determine the best conditions for family-centred care. Data were collected by reviewing the patients' files and administering semi-structured interviews. The data were analysed using the software program Atlas.ti and were re-analysed by an independent researcher. Parents and patients were interviewed separately. Fourteen families participated. Four patients had an absolute indication for surgery. All families were eager to have the patient's facial appearance improved. Nevertheless, despite psychological counselling, they experienced stress when confronted with the changed facial appearance. Another stressor was weight loss. Six patients were in a state of acute malnutrition and needed supplementary feeding. We conclude that the best conditions for family-centred care should be aligned to the different phases of treatment. Leading up to surgery it is important to screen families' expectations regarding aesthetic, functional and social outcomes and to assess their capacity to cope with the long treatment and effects of changed facial appearance. Peer contact and psychosocial training to increase self-esteem are tools to enhance co-operation and satisfaction. During the distraction and stabilisation phase, we advise the monitoring of nutritional intake and weight. During all phases of treatment easy accessibility to the team is recommended.