AzTrials
AzTrials

Cleft Lip and PalateNCT03395015

Efficacy of Maxillo-facial Treatment on Cleft Lip and Palate Patients Faces: Aesthetic Considerations

An observational study of Cleft Lip and Palate and Growth and Development, run by Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS at 1 site in Italy.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The aim of the study is to analyze the esthetic outcome of the first surgical repair of cleft lip and palate (CLP) patients. The aim of the study is to identify differences in the aesthetic evaluation of full-face and nasolabial region 3-D images of CLP patients following primary lip repair by laypeople. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 20 to 25 years
What is being tested?
VAS scale (from 1 to 10) esthetic assessment of facial 3-D images
How many people
10 participants
Where
1 siteItaly
Study dates
5 Jun 2017to 22 Dec 2017
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 20 to 25 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult

Study population: The lay panel consisted of 50 undergraduate students who had little or no training in cleft palate or cranio-facial treatment. All panelists were recruited from the Catholic University of Sacred Heart. The participation of the study is voluntary. A preliminary assessment of raters' knowledge has been performed through an oral examination.

Who may be able to join

  • age, between 20 and 25 years
  • sex, in order to have at least 25 male and female raters
  • sociocultural status: the layperson panel includes undergraduate students without extensive professional knowledge on cleft lip and palate patients

Who cannot join

  • previous participation in research studies
  • familiarity or close friendship with cleft lip and palate patients
  • lack of blindness about the study protocol (it could bias the reported results)

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Italy1 site
  • Catholic University of the Sacred Heart

    Roma, Italia, 00168

Other trials in Italy

About this study

Official title: Efficacia Del Trattamento Chirurgico Maxillo-facciale Sul Volto Dei Bambini Con Labiopalatoschisi: Valutazioni Estetiche ed Ortodontiche

The aim of the study is to analyze the esthetic outcome of the first surgical repair of cleft lip and palate (CLP) patients.

The aim of the study is to identify differences in the aesthetic evaluation of full-face and nasolabial region 3-D images of CLP patients following primary lip repair by laypeople.

Read the detailed description

The management of cleft lip and palate patient's generally involves the soft palate reconstruction as well as the repair of lip and nasal soft tissue defects.

From an esthetic point of view, the primary repair, usually performed between 9 and 18 months of age, prepares the patients to grow into childhood and succeed in life without focusing on their deformity.

An increasing number of outcome measure rating systems has been raised, suggesting a lack of consensus to a reliable, validated and reproducible scoring system for facial aesthetics in cleft patients. Many templates and lay panel scoring systems have been described, yet never fully validated. Advanced 3D imaging technologies may produce validated outcome measures in the future, but presently there remains a need to develop a robust method of facial aesthetic evaluation based on standardised patient photographs.

The aim of the study is to to determine and compare the level of agreement among examiners' subjective aesthetic evaluation of full-face and nasolabial region 3-D images of CLP patients following primary lip repair by laypeople, developing some recommendations for a consistent scoring protocol.

Being tested
VAS scale (from 1 to 10) esthetic assessment of facial 3-D images
Keywords
Reconstructive surgical procedures, Therapy, soft tissue, Treatment outcome, Outcome Assessment (Health Care), Photogrammetry, Physical Appearance, Body
Medical subject headings
Cleft Lip, Cicatrix

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • VAS scale (from 1 to 10) esthetic assessment of facial 3-D imagesOther

    The rating process is biphasic: firstly a 3-D model is showed to the raters, who can orientate the vultus, familiarize with the 3-D technology and have a first glance evaluation. Secondly, the judges are asked to rate each of the following patient views: right profile, left profile, frontal, neck hyperextension and hyperflexion views Two weeks after the first assessment, the same judges assessed the same number of pictures, once again in random order.

Study groups in NCT03395015
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Full-face 3-D images3-D images acquisition of CLP patients' faces at rest is set at different timepoints: 1 week preoperative, 1- and 6-months postoperative. Therefore, laypeople's assessment of the facial appearance of CLP patients is based on full facial views.
Receives: Other: VAS scale (from 1 to 10) esthetic assessment of facial 3-D images
Nasolabial 3-D imagesThe control group is composed of cropped 3-D images of CLP patients' faces at rest, which show isolated nasolabial regions of CLP patients. The judgement of these pictures warrants an assessment based solely on the nasolabial appearance.
Receives: Other: VAS scale (from 1 to 10) esthetic assessment of facial 3-D images

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Intrarater and interrater consistency

    The primary outcome of this study is to compare intrarater and interrater reliability of the ratings in both groups.

    The reliability of a panel of 3 and 6 judges for the different scoreswere estimated by using the Cronbach alfa formula.

    Measured: 3-D images are assessed twice, the timespan between the two evaluations is two weeks

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted9 Jan 2018
  2. Study start5 Jun 2017
  3. Primary completion20 Jul 2017
  4. Study completion22 Dec 2017

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Case-control
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrolment
10 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03395015
Sponsor's protocol ID
0027003/17
Status last verified
Jan 2018
First submitted
3 Jan 2018
Last updated
9 Jan 2018
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Yes

Publications

  • Iliopoulos C, Mitsimponas K, Lazaridou D, Neukam FW, Stelzle F. A retrospective evaluation of the aesthetics of the nasolabial complex after unilateral cleft lip repair using the Tennison-Randall technique: a study of 44 cases treated in a single cleft center. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014 Dec;42(8):1679-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2014.05.013. Epub 2014 May 24.

    PubMed 24962045
  • Eichenberger M, Staudt CB, Pandis N, Gnoinski W, Eliades T. Facial attractiveness of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate and of controls assessed by laypersons and professionals. Eur J Orthod. 2014 Jun;36(3):284-9. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjt047. Epub 2013 Jul 5.

    PubMed 23832974
  • de Ladeira PR, Alonso N. Protocols in cleft lip and palate treatment: systematic review. Plast Surg Int. 2012;2012:562892. doi: 10.1155/2012/562892. Epub 2012 Nov 1.

    PubMed 23213503
  • Sharma VP, Bella H, Cadier MM, Pigott RW, Goodacre TE, Richard BM. Outcomes in facial aesthetics in cleft lip and palate surgery: a systematic review. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2012 Sep;65(9):1233-45. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2012.04.001. Epub 2012 May 15.

    PubMed 22591614
  • Stebel A, Desmedt D, Bronkhorst E, Kuijpers MA, Fudalej PS. Rating nasolabial appearance on three-dimensional images in cleft lip and palate: a comparison with standard photographs. Eur J Orthod. 2016 Apr;38(2):197-201. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjv024. Epub 2015 Apr 21.

    PubMed 25900054
  • Mosmuller DG, Bijnen CL, Kramer GJ, Disse MA, Prahl C, Kuik DJ, Niessen FB, Don Griot JP. The Asher-McDade Aesthetic Index in Comparison With Two Scoring Systems in Nonsyndromic Complete Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients. J Craniofac Surg. 2015 Jun;26(4):1242-5. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000001784.

    PubMed 26080166

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Cleft Lip and Palate and Growth and Development, run by Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS at 1 site in Italy.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Jan 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Italy. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Intrarater and interrater consistency (time frame: 3-D images are assessed twice, the timespan between the two evaluations is two weeks). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03395015, which also lists 6 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Jan 2018.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in