Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 18, 2026
Method of Studying Palatal Fusion using Static Organ Culture
Published on: September 19, 2015
Multidisciplinary Cleft Palate Program at BC Children's Hospital: Are We Meeting the Standards of Care?
Anita Dahiya1,2, Rebecca Courtemanche1,3, Douglas J Courtemanche1,3
1Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Insights
Timely cleft palate care is challenging, with only 32% of patients meeting specific program recommendations despite 51% meeting general guidelines. Improvements in resource allocation and program support are needed for better patient outcomes.
Area of Science:
- Craniofacial medicine
- Pediatric healthcare management
- Public health policy
Background:
- Cleft Palate Programs (CPPs) aim to provide timely, multidisciplinary care for patients with clefts and craniofacial conditions.
- Adherence to established guidelines, such as those from the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association (ACPA), is crucial for optimal patient outcomes.
- Assessing the timeliness of appointments within CPPs is essential for identifying areas of care delivery that require improvement.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the current practices of a Cleft Palate Program (CPP) regarding appointment timeliness.
- To compare the timeliness of patient appointments against American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association (ACPA) population guidelines and specific CPP recommendations.
- To identify factors influencing appointment timeliness in relation to patient age and diagnosis.
Main Methods:
- A retrospective review of 1214 appointments within a CPP at BC Children's Hospital was conducted.
- Data spanned from November 6, 2012, to March 31, 2015, including patients aged 0–27 years.
- Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze appointment timeliness based on ACPA standards and CPP recommendations.
Main Results:
- Patients aged 5 years or younger, and nonsyndromic patients, were significantly more likely to have timely appointments (P < .001).
- No correlation was found between appointment timeliness and specific diagnoses or patient distance to the clinic.
- While 97% of nursing appointments were timely, less than 45% of other disciplines met timeliness targets; 51% met ACPA guidelines, but only 32% met specific CPP recommendations.
Conclusions:
- The Cleft Palate Program faces challenges in delivering timely care to its patient population.
- A significant gap exists between general ACPA guidelines and specific CPP recommendations, with only 32% of patients meeting the latter.
- Enhancing resource allocation and program support is recommended to improve the timeliness of care and optimize patient outcomes.
Objective:
To characterize current Cleft Palate Program (CPP) practices and evaluate the timeliness of appointments with respect to patient age and diagnosis based on American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association (ACPA) population guidelines and CPP patient-specific recommendations.
Design:
A retrospective review of CPP patient appointments from November 6, 2012, to March 31, 2015, was done. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
Setting:
The study was conducted using data from the CPP at BC Children's Hospital.
Patients:
A total of 1214 appointments were considered in the analysis, including syndromic and nonsyndromic patients of 0 to 27 years of age.
Main Outcome Measures:
Percentage of patients meeting follow-up targets by ACPA standards and CPP team recommendations.
Results:
Our results showed patients 5 years and younger or nonsyndromic were more likely to be seen on time (P < .001). No relationship between the timeliness of an appointment and specific patient diagnoses or distance to clinic was found. With the exception of nursing (97% of appointments were on time), all disciplines had less than 45% of appointments on time with 51% of appointments meeting ACPA guidelines for timeliness and 32% of all appointments meeting CPP recommendations.
Conclusion:
Timely care for the cleft/craniofacial patient populations represents a challenge for the CPP. Although half of patients may meet the general ACPA guidelines, only 32% of patients are meeting the CPP patient-specific recommendations. To provide better patient care, future adjustments are needed, which may include improved resource allotment and program support.
