IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i17p10638-d898301.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Current Treatment of Cleft Patients in Europe from a Provider Perspective: A Cross-Sectional Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Inês Francisco

    (Institute of Orthodontics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal
    Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Area of Environment Genetics and Oncobiology (CIMAGO), Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal)

  • Gregory S. Antonarakis

    (Division of Orthodontics, University Clinics of Dental Medicine, University of Geneva, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland)

  • Francisco Caramelo

    (Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Area of Environment Genetics and Oncobiology (CIMAGO), Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal
    Laboratory of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics (LBIM), Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-531 Coimbra, Portugal
    Clinical Academic Center of Coimbra (CACC), 3030-370 Coimbra, Portugal
    Centre for Innovative Biomedicine and Biotechnology (CIBB), University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal)

  • Anabela Baptista Paula

    (Institute of Orthodontics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal
    Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Area of Environment Genetics and Oncobiology (CIMAGO), Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal
    Clinical Academic Center of Coimbra (CACC), 3030-370 Coimbra, Portugal
    Centre for Innovative Biomedicine and Biotechnology (CIBB), University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal)

  • Carlos Miguel Marto

    (Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Area of Environment Genetics and Oncobiology (CIMAGO), Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal
    Clinical Academic Center of Coimbra (CACC), 3030-370 Coimbra, Portugal
    Centre for Innovative Biomedicine and Biotechnology (CIBB), University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal
    Institute of Integrated Clinical Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-531 Coimbra, Portugal)

  • Eunice Carrilho

    (Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Area of Environment Genetics and Oncobiology (CIMAGO), Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal
    Clinical Academic Center of Coimbra (CACC), 3030-370 Coimbra, Portugal
    Centre for Innovative Biomedicine and Biotechnology (CIBB), University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal
    Institute of Integrated Clinical Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-531 Coimbra, Portugal)

  • Maria Helena Fernandes

    (Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Porto, 4200-393 Porto, Portugal
    LAQV/REQUIMTE, University of Porto, 4160-007 Porto, Portugal)

  • Francisco Vale

    (Institute of Orthodontics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal
    Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Area of Environment Genetics and Oncobiology (CIMAGO), Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal)

Abstract

The latest Eurocleft study reported several discrepancies in cleft care. Since then, no critical assessment has been performed. This study aimed to better understand the main strengths and inefficiencies of cleft care within Europe. The Google documents platform was used to create an online survey to investigate several aspects, i.e., provider characteristics, patient profile, services offered, and treatment protocols and complications. Descriptive statistics were calculated. The association between categorical variables was performed using Fisher’s exact test. The significance level chosen was 0.05. A total of 69 individuals from 23 European countries completed the survey. Centralized care was the preferred system, and the majority of the countries have an association for cleft patients and professionals (53.6%). The largest percentage of patients was seen in the university hospital environment (Fisher’s exact test p < 0.001). The majority of responders (98.6%) reported that an orthodontist was involved in cleft treatment, and 56.5% of them spend 76–100% of their time treating these patients. Despite cleft care having been reconfigured in Europe, a better consensus among the various centers regarding provider characteristics, services offered, and treatment protocols is still required. There is a need for better coordination between clinicians and national/international regulatory bodies.

Suggested Citation

  • Inês Francisco & Gregory S. Antonarakis & Francisco Caramelo & Anabela Baptista Paula & Carlos Miguel Marto & Eunice Carrilho & Maria Helena Fernandes & Francisco Vale, 2022. "Current Treatment of Cleft Patients in Europe from a Provider Perspective: A Cross-Sectional Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-12, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:17:p:10638-:d:898301
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/17/10638/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/17/10638/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Francisco Vale & Inês Francisco & António Lucas & Ana Roseiro & Francisco Caramelo & Adriana Sobral, 2020. "Timing of Spheno-Occipital Synchondrosis Ossification in Children and Adolescents with Cleft Lip and Palate: A Retrospective Case-Control Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-11, November.
    2. Valeria Luzzi & Giulia Zumbo & Mariana Guaragna & Gabriele Di Carlo & Gaetano Ierardo & Gian Luca Sfasciotti & Maurizio Bossù & Iole Vozza & Antonella Polimeni, 2021. "The Role of the Pediatric Dentist in the Multidisciplinary Management of the Cleft Lip Palate Patient," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-9, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:17:p:10638-:d:898301. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.