Nasolabial appearance in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients: A comparison of aesthetics using two scoring systems: A cross‐sectional study. (9th April 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Talwar, Aditya; Duggal, Isha; Duggal, Ritu; Chaudhari, Prabhat Kumar; Samrit, Vilas
• Is Part Of: Orthodontics and craniofacial research. Volume 26:Number 1(2023)
• Page Start: 46
• Page End: 52
• Publication Date: 2022-04-09
• Subjects: lip form -- nasolabial aesthetics -- nose -- orthodontics -- unilateral cleft lip and palate; Skull -- Growth -- Periodicals; Facial bones -- Growth -- Periodicals; Orthodontics -- Periodicals; Orthodontics, Corrective -- Periodicals; Orthodontic appliances -- Periodicals; 617.51
• DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12576
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1601-6335

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: The objective of the study was to assess nasolabial aesthetics in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip, with or without cleft palate (UCL ± P) using two scoring systems. Design: A cross‐sectional study conducted in a tertiary care government hospital. Patients: Photographic records of 91 patients with complete UCL ± P from the age group of 5–18 years (mean age = 13.2 ± 3.14 years) were included. Method: A panel of three orthodontists with varying experience in cleft management rated nasolabial aesthetics using two scoring systems, that is Asher Mc‐Dade index (AMAI) and Cleft Aesthetic Rating Scale (CARS). Intraclass correlation coefficient, Fleiss' kappa and Cronbach's alpha were used to measure the internal consistency amongst three raters and Spearman–Brown formula was used for measuring overall reliability. Time required for assessment of each photograph was compared with ANOVA. Results: Overall, both AMAI and CARS showed high reliability and outcome assessment with good inter‐rater reliability and internal consistency, when used independently by orthodontists having varied experience. Statistically significant difference was present in time taken for assessment of nasolabial aesthetics with CARS index (8.75 ± 1.65 seconds) as compared to AMAI (18.62 ± 3.49 seconds). Conclusion: Asher Mc‐Dade index and CARS are equally reliable and consistent for the assessment of nasolabial aesthetics in patients with UCL ± P. However, considerably less time was taken for the assessment using CARS index as compared to AMAI. The use of CARS index is recommended for the initial assessment and screening of patients by orthodontists using two dimensional photographs.