Disparities in Speech and Language Delay Among Children With Aural Atresia.

OBJECTIVE: To describe risk factors for speech and language delay in a diverse population of children with aural atresia. METHODS: Retrospective chart review was performed from 2012 to 2020 at UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital to identify children with aural atresia evaluated for speech, language, or auditory skills delays. Ninety-five children with aural atresia, conductive hearing loss, and assessment of speech, language, or auditory skills delay were included. Demographic and clinical data were analyzed to identify predictors of speech and language delay. Cohort and case-control analyses were performed to determine risk factors for delayed intervention, and for ultimate delays in speech, language, or auditory skills. RESULTS: Children exhibited a wide diversity of race/ethnicity, primary home language, geography, and insurance status. Eighty-nine percent had unilateral aural atresia. Forty-eight percent had delays in speech, language, or auditory skills. Most children used hearing aids (84%), had educational accommodations (84%), and received speech therapy (63%). In a univariate retrospective cohort analysis, public-insured ( p = 0.004), non-English speaking ( p = 0.002) and non-white/non-Hispanic children ( p = 0.007) were found to be significantly less likely to be fit with hearing aids in infancy. Children with delays were fit with hearing aids at later ages. In a multivariate case-control analysis, primary home language was a significant predictor for presence of delays [OR, 3.9 (95% CI: 1.2-13.2), p = 0.03]. CONCLUSIONS: Disparities due to insurance type, primary language, and race/ethnicity are associated with delays in hearing aid fitting for children with aural atresia. Earlier, hearing amplification is correlated with reduced risk for speech, language, and auditory skills delay. These findings can help identify at-risk children for targeted support.

Long-term Speech Outcomes of Cleft Palate Repair in Robin Sequence versus Isolated Cleft Palate.

Whether treatment of cleft palate (CP) associated with Robin sequence (RS) should attain outcomes similar to those of isolated cleft palate (ICP) remains unknown. This study compares treatment and outcomes in both conditions and delineates predictors of long-term outcome. METHODS: This retrospective case series of consecutive syndromic and isolated RS- and ICP-patients (1990-2016) includes indications and outcomes of straight-line repair with intravelar veloplasty (SLIV) or Furlow repair depending on cleft and airway characteristics. RESULTS: Seventy-five RS and 83 ICP patients underwent CP repair. Velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) occurred in 41% of RS versus 17% of ICP patients (P = 0.012), and in 60% of patients with syndromic RS versus 16% with isolated RS (P = 0.005). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, wider and more severe CP anatomy was the only factor independently associated with VPI (P = 0.028), in contrast to age at repair, syndromic RS compared with isolated RS, and isolated RS compared with ICP and initial tongue-lip adhesion. Secondary Furlow after primary SLIV was used to treat VPI in all groups, and more frequently in syndromic versus isolated RS patients (P = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Variability of RS anatomy and airway compromise necessitates individualized treatment protocols. Despite differing CP etiology and other variables, our findings demonstrate cleft anatomy as the only independent variable predictive of VPI comparing RS and ICP patients. Patients with isolated RS should ultimately attain similar VPI outcomes compared with ICP patients. Obstructive speech operations in RS patients can be avoided without compromising speech outcome by reserving the prsocedure for secondary cases.