File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: The effect of cranio-maxillofacial osteotomies and distraction osteogenesis on speech and velopharyngeal status: A critical review

TitleThe effect of cranio-maxillofacial osteotomies and distraction osteogenesis on speech and velopharyngeal status: A critical review
Authors
KeywordsDistraction osteogenesis
Maxillary advancement
Orthognathic surgery
Osteotomy
Reliability
Review
Speech
Velopharyngeal
Issue Date2006
PublisherAllen Press Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://cpcj.allenpress.com
Citation
Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 2006, v. 43 n. 4, p. 477-487 How to Cite?
AbstractObjectives: To review the impact of maxillary advancement by orthognathic surgery and distraction osteogenesis on speech and velopharyngeal status based on the literature of the past 30+ years, to review the methods employed in previous studies to explain discrepancies in results, and to make recommendations for future studies. Method: Thirty-nine published articles on the effect of cranio-maxillofacial osteotomies and distraction osteogenesis on speech and velopharyngeal status were identified and were systematically analyzed. A total of 747 cases of cleft and noncieft patients were selected, including craniofacial deformities and syndromes mainly involving maxillary hypoplasia. Results: Findings varied. Many studies found that surgery had no impact on speech and velopharyngeal status. Some reported worsening only in patients with preexisting velopharyngeal impairment or those with borderline velopharyngeal function before surgery. There was no clear difference in outcome between distraction and conventional osteotomy, although there have been few systematic comparisons. There was great variation among reviewed studies in the number of subjects, speech sample, number and type of listeners, speech outcome measures, and timing of postoperative assessment. Few studies employed reliability measures. Conclusion: None of the 39 reviewed studies compared conventional osteotomy and distraction by including both groups in a single study. Randomized controlled trials with adequate number of subjects and follow-up duration are needed.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/66094
ISSN
2010 Impact Factor: 0.77
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.685
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChanchareonsook, Nen_HK
dc.contributor.authorSamman, Nen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWhitehill, TLen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T05:43:32Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T05:43:32Z-
dc.date.issued2006en_HK
dc.identifier.citationCleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 2006, v. 43 n. 4, p. 477-487en_HK
dc.identifier.issn1055-6656en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/66094-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To review the impact of maxillary advancement by orthognathic surgery and distraction osteogenesis on speech and velopharyngeal status based on the literature of the past 30+ years, to review the methods employed in previous studies to explain discrepancies in results, and to make recommendations for future studies. Method: Thirty-nine published articles on the effect of cranio-maxillofacial osteotomies and distraction osteogenesis on speech and velopharyngeal status were identified and were systematically analyzed. A total of 747 cases of cleft and noncieft patients were selected, including craniofacial deformities and syndromes mainly involving maxillary hypoplasia. Results: Findings varied. Many studies found that surgery had no impact on speech and velopharyngeal status. Some reported worsening only in patients with preexisting velopharyngeal impairment or those with borderline velopharyngeal function before surgery. There was no clear difference in outcome between distraction and conventional osteotomy, although there have been few systematic comparisons. There was great variation among reviewed studies in the number of subjects, speech sample, number and type of listeners, speech outcome measures, and timing of postoperative assessment. Few studies employed reliability measures. Conclusion: None of the 39 reviewed studies compared conventional osteotomy and distraction by including both groups in a single study. Randomized controlled trials with adequate number of subjects and follow-up duration are needed.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherAllen Press Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://cpcj.allenpress.comen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofCleft Palate-Craniofacial Journalen_HK
dc.subjectDistraction osteogenesisen_HK
dc.subjectMaxillary advancementen_HK
dc.subjectOrthognathic surgeryen_HK
dc.subjectOsteotomyen_HK
dc.subjectReliabilityen_HK
dc.subjectReviewen_HK
dc.subjectSpeechen_HK
dc.subjectVelopharyngealen_HK
dc.subject.meshArticulation Disorders - surgeryen_HK
dc.subject.meshCephalometryen_HK
dc.subject.meshCleft Lip - complicationsen_HK
dc.subject.meshCleft Palate - complicationsen_HK
dc.subject.meshEndoscopyen_HK
dc.subject.meshFluoroscopyen_HK
dc.subject.meshHumansen_HK
dc.subject.meshMaxilla - abnormalities - surgeryen_HK
dc.subject.meshOral Surgical Procedures - methodsen_HK
dc.subject.meshOsteogenesis, Distractionen_HK
dc.subject.meshOsteotomy, Le Forten_HK
dc.subject.meshRetrognathism - etiology - surgeryen_HK
dc.subject.meshRhinomanometryen_HK
dc.subject.meshVelopharyngeal Insufficiency - surgeryen_HK
dc.subject.meshVoice Disorders - surgeryen_HK
dc.titleThe effect of cranio-maxillofacial osteotomies and distraction osteogenesis on speech and velopharyngeal status: A critical reviewen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=1055-6656&volume=43 &issue=4&spage=p. 477&epage=487&date=2006&atitle=The+effect+of+cranio-maxillofacial+osteotomies+and+distraction+osteogenesis+on+speech+and+velopharyngeal+status:+a+critical+reviewen_HK
dc.identifier.emailSamman, N: nsamman@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailWhitehill, TL: tara@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authoritySamman, N=rp00021en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityWhitehill, TL=rp00970en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1597/05-001.1en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid16854207-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-33746279957en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros127655en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-33746279957&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume43en_HK
dc.identifier.issue4en_HK
dc.identifier.spage477en_HK
dc.identifier.epage487en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000239420200014-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChanchareonsook, N=14046583100en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSamman, N=7006413627en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWhitehill, TL=7004098633en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats