Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cross-sectional survey evaluates caregiver experiences with PLANA therapy in infants, indicating high satisfaction and low burden.
Objective To evaluate caregiver experiences with presurgical lip, alveolus, and nose approximation (PLANA) therapy, including adherence, burden, support, and perceived effectiveness in infants with cleft lip and/or palate. Design Cross-sectional survey study using an anonymous, voluntary questionnaire administered via Research Electronic Data Capture. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize responses, and qualitative responses were analyzed for common themes. Setting Single tertiary care academic institution. Patients, Participants Caregivers of infants with cleft lip and/or palate undergoing PLANA therapy were identified through institutional records. Of 48 eligible caregivers, 23 unique responses were included. Interventions PLANA therapy utilizing the NoseAlign device with concurrent lip taping, applied at home with periodic clinical follow-up. Main Outcome Measure(s) Caregiver-reported adherence, training satisfaction, infant tolerance, caregiver burden, perceived support, and perceived effectiveness. Results Caregivers reported high satisfaction with training (73.9% very satisfied) and high adherence, with 87.0% reporting consistent use and 100% reporting daily wear. Most reported no feeding interference (86.4%) and good infant tolerance (73.9% comfortable or very comfortable). Caregiver burden was low, with 60.9% reporting minimal impact on daily routines and 78.3% reporting confidence in application. Perceived support from the medical team was uniformly high (100%). Overall, 90.9% were satisfied with outcomes, and 95.7% would recommend PLANA therapy. Conclusions PLANA therapy demonstrates high caregiver satisfaction, strong adherence, and favorable perceived outcomes. Its simplified design may reduce caregiver burden while maintaining effectiveness. Further studies are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ricke et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: