Sustainable Cleft Care: A Comprehensive Model Based on the Global Smile Foundation Experience.

INTRODUCTION: Clefts of the lip and palate are leading congenital facial anomalies. Underserved patients with these facial differences lack access to medical care, surgical expertise, prenatal care, or psychological support. Moreover, the disease results in significant economic strains on patients and their families. While surgical outreach programs have attempted to fill this void, significant challenges facing international comprehensive cleft care persist. OBJECTIVE: Propose a path toward international sustainable cleft care based on the Global Smile Foundation experience. RESULTS: International sustainable comprehensive cleft care can be achieved by regulating surgical outreach programs. Regulation of these missions would ensure standardized care and encourage stakeholders to cooperate and adequately allocate funding and resources. Capacity building can be achieved through "diagonal" cleft care delivery models, multidisciplinary workshops, fellowship programs, research and quality assurance, as well as leveraging emerging technologies such as Augmented Reality. CONCLUSION: International comprehensive cleft care requires continuous collaborative efforts between visiting and local teams as well as international and national organizations. Standardizing and regulating current practices as well as promoting capacity building initiatives can contribute to sustainable cleft care.

Simulation-Based Comprehensive Cleft Care Workshops: A Reproducible Model for Sustainable Education.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate simulation-based comprehensive cleft care workshops as a reproducible model for education with sustained impact. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey-based evaluation. SETTING: Simulation-based comprehensive cleft care workshop. PARTICIPANTS: Total of 180 participants. INTERVENTIONS: Three-day simulation-based comprehensive cleft care workshop. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of workshop participants stratified by specialty, satisfaction with the workshop, satisfaction with simulation-based workshops as educational tools, impact on cleft surgery procedural confidence, short-term impact on clinical practice, medium-term impact on clinical practice. RESULTS: The workshop included 180 participants from 5 continents. The response rate was 54.5%, with participants reporting high satisfaction with all aspects of the workshop and with simulation-based workshops as educational tools. Participants reported a significant improvement in cleft lip (33.3 ± 5.7 vs 25.7 ± 7.6; P < .001) and palate (32.4 ± 7.1 vs 23.7 ± 6.6; P < .001) surgery procedural confidence following the simulation sessions. Participants also reported a positive short-term and medium-term impact on their clinical practices. CONCLUSION: Simulation-based comprehensive cleft care workshops are well received by participants, lead to improved cleft surgery procedural confidence, and have a sustained positive impact on participants' clinical practices. Future efforts should focus on evaluating and quantifying this perceived positive impact, as well reproducing these efforts in other areas of need.