What does this research mean for the field?

The centralization of UK cleft services has significantly reduced the odds of faltering growth in children born with cleft palate and a diagnosed syndrome or Robin sequence, although the overall prevalence in the cleft population remains high at 29%. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.INCREMENTAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

This research aims to assess the prevalence of faltering growth in infants with cleft lip and palate and compare findings to data collected before the centralization of cleft services.

May 20, 2026

Faltering Growth in Cleft Lip/Palate: How Far Have We Come?

Key Points

This research aims to assess the prevalence of faltering growth in infants with cleft lip and palate and compare findings to data collected before the centralization of cleft services.
Utilized data from the Cleft Collective longitudinal cohort study
Determined faltering growth based on NICE guidelines
Employed χ2 test and logistic regression for comparison pre- and post-centralization
24% of participants experienced faltering growth per NICE guidelines.
Infants with cleft palate were 3.3 times more likely to have faltering growth compared to those with isolated cleft lip.
Moderate evidence suggests a 78% decrease in the odds of faltering growth in children with palatal cleft and a syndrome post-centralization.

Abstract

Background: Faltering growth (FG) in infants with cleft lip and/or palate (CLP) is common, largely due to challenges in early feeding. Several single-center studies have looked at FG in CLP, predominantly before the Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG) report. One such study reported FG in 43.3% of palatal clefts (CP±L). Since the centralization of cleft services in the UK and early intervention by cleft nurse specialists, the authors would expect decreased levels of FG. Aim: Explore the prevalence of FG in infants with CLP and compare the results with data precentralization. Methodology: Data from the Cleft Collective, a longitudinal cohort study, were used to describe FG postcentralization. FG was determined according to NICE definitions. Prevalence of FG precentralization was taken from Pandya and Boorman (2001). A χ 2 test and logistic regression were used to compare FG between cleft type and pre- and postcentralization. Results: Data were available for 153 participants. In the sample, 24% of children were considered to have faltering growth as per NICE guidelines, and 29% of children were considered to fall within the failure-to-thrive category as per the Pandya and Boorman (2001) paper. Moderate evidence was found to suggest infants with CP±L were 3.3 times more likely to have FG than infants with an isolated cleft lip. When adjusting for the presence of a syndrome and/or PRS, the odds were reduced slightly but still showed an increase in the odds of faltering growth in children born with CP±L compared with cleft lip only. Little evidence was found to suggest a difference in FG pre- and postcentralization for CP±L; however, moderate statistical evidence was found to suggest a 78% decrease in the odds of FG for children born with a palatal cleft and diagnosed with syndrome and/or PRS postcentralization compared with precentralization. Conclusion: This study concludes that the prevalence of faltering growth within our sample is 29%, based on data from the Cleft Collective cohort, as per the latest guidelines published by NICE. There is moderate evidence to suggest that the odds of faltering growth in children born with cleft palate and a diagnosed syndrome or Robin sequence have reduced over the last 20 years, and this is likely due to the centralization of cleft services and early intervention of cleft CNSs.

Mark Helpful

Bookmark

Relay