What question did this study set out to answer?

This research aims to compare speech outcomes in children with cleft palate and additional conditions at ages 5 and 10.

April 13, 2026Open Access

Comparisons of longitudinal speech outcomes in children born with cleft palate ± cleft lip with and without additional conditions at 5 and 10 years –a registry study

Puntos clave

This research aims to compare speech outcomes in children with cleft palate and additional conditions at ages 5 and 10.
Analyzed data from the Swedish CLP registry for children born 2009-2012.
Grouped participants by cleft type and additional conditions.
Measured speech outcomes including consonant production and velopharyngeal function at ages 5 and 10.
Used statistical tests like Pearson's chi-square and Fisher's exact test for comparisons.
Participants with additional conditions had poorer speech outcomes at both ages compared to those without.
Significant differences in consonant production and intelligibility were found in specific cleft subtypes at age 5 and 10.
Overall, speech improved between ages 5 and 10 across all groups.

Resumen

Speech outcome differences in children with cleft palate ± cleft lip (CP ± L) with ( +) and without (-) additional conditions (i.e., diagnosed syndromes, additional malformations, and intellectual disabilities) are not fully explored. The Swedish cleft lip and palate (CLP) registry enables a longitudinal approach. Thus, the purpose was to compare longitudinal speech outcomes in children with different cleft types, with and without additional conditions, at ages 5 and 10 years, based on registry data. Included were all children with oral clefts involving the palate born in Sweden 2009–2012, with speech registrations at both 5 and 10 years in the Swedish CLP registry (n = 404): 16 cleft soft palate (SP) + , 37 SP-, 67 cleft soft and hard palate (SHP) + , 88 SHP-, 19 unilateral cleft lip palate (UCLP) + , 116 UCLP-, 15 bilateral cleft lip palate (BCLP) + and 46 BCLP-. The speech outcomes percentage of consonants correct, percentage of nonoral speech errors, velopharyngeal competence, and results of the Intelligibility in Context Scale were dichotomized. For group comparisons, Pearson’s chi-square test and Fisher’s exact test were performed. No significant differences were found between the UCLP + /UCLP- and BCLP + /BCLP- groups. In the SP group, a significantly lower proportion of participants with additional conditions than without had age-appropriate consonant production at age 5 (SP + 33.3%; SP- 79.4%), sufficient velopharyngeal function at age 10 (SP + 73.3%; SP- 97.3%), and always intelligible speech at age 10 (SP + 33.3%; SP- 78.6%). In the SHP group, a significantly lower proportion of participants with additional conditions than without had age-appropriate consonant production at age 5 (SHP + 60.6%; SHP- 82.1%) and 10 (SHP + 73.8%; SHP-95.5%), sufficient velopharyngeal function at age 5 (SHP + 82.1%; SHP- 95.5%), and always intelligible speech at age 10 years (SHP + 51.7%; SHP- 83.8%). For all cleft types with and without additional conditions and for all measured speech outcomes, speech improved between 5 and 10 years of age. Speech results were poorer for children with SP + and SHP + at both 5 and 10 years of age. The results highlight the need to consider heterogeneity within cleft subgroups when planning speech improving interventions.

Me gusta

Guardar

Ver artículo completo