Reliability of the Dutch Cleft Speech Evaluation Test and Conversion to the Proposed Universal Scale.

The Dutch cleft speech evaluation test (DCSET) has been implemented by the speech-language pathologists nationwide in the Netherlands since 2003, but the inter- and intrarater reliability was unknown. Two speech-language pathologists experienced in evaluating cleft speech assessed audio recordings of 20 children with cleft speech using the DCSET, and reassessed the recordings 2 weeks later. Intra- and interrater reliability was calculated, but found to be unacceptable after the first phase of this study using audio recordings. Following consensus training and some modifications in the scoring scales, the study was repeated using video recordings of 20 different children with cleft speech. Results from the second phase of this study using standardized video recordings showed fair, moderate, and good reliability on different subsets of the DCSET. Intrarater reliability (Kappa 0.59-1.00) was greater than interrater reliability (Kappa 0.33-0.79). Interrater reliability agreement was good (Kappa 0.63-0.79) for consonant production errors and speech understandability and acceptability, moderate (Kappa 0.59) for the resonance of the nasal passage, and fair (Kappa 0.33-0.37) for the resonance of the mixed and denasal passages. Subsequently, an algorithm was made to convert the DCSET scales to universal scales for international comparison of cleft speech as suggested by Henningsson et al in 2008.

Educational impact of a novel cleft palate surgical simulator: Improvement in surgical trainees' knowledge and confidence.

BACKGROUND: Trainees' experience in cleft surgery is limited due to the high-risk nature of the surgery and centralization of cleft care. Simulation training allows trainees to learn complex surgical tasks whilst ensuring patient safety. Existing cleft surgical simulators are over-simplified or prohibitively expensive. In this article, we show the development and application of a high-fidelity yet cost-effective simulator for cleft palate repair. METHODS: Skeletal elements were obtained through high-resolution scanning of a pathologic specimen, 3-dimensional printed, and then molded in plastic. Soft tissue components were formed through molding layers of silicone. The simulator was tested by 26 United Kingdom (UK) specialty trainees who performed a vomerine mucosal flap and intra-velar veloplasty in a 1-hour workshop. Pre- and post-simulation questionnaires assessing cleft knowledge and surgical confidence were compared for statistical significance. RESULTS: The simulator had high acceptability: 23/26 participants confirmed that the simulation training was a valuable learning experience. Baseline experience of cleft palate surgery was low: 24 participants had never performed any part of the procedure before. Following the workshop, mean knowledge score increased by 38%, and confidence by 53%. The paired T-test demonstrated that observed improvements in both knowledge and confidence were statistically significant (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Simulation training is increasingly recognized as a crucial component of improving patient safety. Our new cost-effective cleft palate simulator has high acceptability and is a powerful educational tool that is effective in improving cleft palate surgical knowledge and confidence across all grades of surgical trainees.

Poly Implant Prothèse Silicone Breast Explants: Chemical Analysis of Silicone Gel and Implant Shell.

BACKGROUND: Poly Implant Prothèse (PIP) silicone breast implants were removed from the market between 2010 and 2012 because of the use of nonmedical grade silicone filler. The chemical and physico-chemical properties of PIP implants have been analyzed by several groups. In addition, our previous study illustrated that PIP implant shells were more permeable. Therefore, we analyzed the chemical composition of the envelope and gel of PIP silicone breast explants. Also, the composition of absorbed material into the implant was analyzed. METHODS: This study was conducted on 3 PIP implants explanted from 2 patients. The envelope was analyzed using Raman microscopy, whereas the gel was analyzed using near-infrared spectra, nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry. Absorbed material was investigated with Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy and sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. RESULTS: The 3 implants appeared to be Rofil implants, and all implants displayed a yellow color. None of the envelope showed a barrier layer. Amounts of D4, D5, and D6 were found to be below 100 ppm. Water was found in all 3 implants and also proteins were absorbed into the implants. CONCLUSIONS: The current study shows that the analyzed implants originate from the manufacturer Rofil but have PIP1 hallmarks. Apparently, these are own brand labeling implants. The presence of water and proteins in the explants indicate exchange of small and large molecules into the explants, even in the implant with a visually intact envelope. Because of the PIP1 hallmarks of the Rofil implants, patients with such implants are advised to be counseled by their physicians.