medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023
Decision Considerations and Strategies for Lip Surgery in Patients with Cleft lip/Palate: A Qualitative Study.
ПрепринтСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Trotman Carroll Ann, Faraway Julian, Bennett M Elizabeth, Garson G David, Phillips Ceib, Bruun Richard, Daniel Renie, David Lisa Renee, Ganske Ingrid, Leeper Lauren K, Rogers-Vizena Carolyn R, Runyan Christopher, Scott Andrew R, Wood Jeyhan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To qualitatively assess surgeons decision making for lip surgery in patients with cleft lip/palate (CL/P).
DESIGN: Prospective, non-randomized, clinical trial.
SETTING: Clinical data institutional laboratory setting.
PATIENTS PARTICIPANTS: The study included both patient and surgeon participants recruited from four craniofacial centers. The patient participants were babies with a CL/P requiring primary lip repair surgery (n=16) and adolescents with repaired CL/P who may require secondary lip revision surgery (n=32). The surgeon participants (n=8) were experienced in cleft care. Facial imaging data that included 2D images, 3D images, videos, and objective 3D visual modelling of facial movements were collected from each patient, and compiled as a collage termed the Standardized Assessment for Facial Surgery (SAFS) for systematic viewing by the surgeons.
INTERVENTIONS: The SAFS served as the intervention. Each surgeon viewed the SAFS for six distinct patients (two babies and four adolescents) and provided a list of surgical problems and goals. Then an in-depth-interview (IDI) was conducted with each surgeon to explore their decision-making processes. IDIs were conducted either in person or virtually, recorded, and then transcribed for qualitative statistical analyses using the Grounded Theory Method.
RESULTS: Rich narratives/themes emerged that included timing of the surgery; risks/limitations and benefits of surgery; patient/family goals; planning for muscle repair and scarring; multiplicity of surgeries and their impact; and availability of resources. For diagnoses/treatments, surgeons agreed, and level of surgical experience was not a factor.
CONCLUSIONS: The themes provided important information to populate a checklist of considerations to serve as a guide for clinicians.
DESIGN: Prospective, non-randomized, clinical trial.
SETTING: Clinical data institutional laboratory setting.
PATIENTS PARTICIPANTS: The study included both patient and surgeon participants recruited from four craniofacial centers. The patient participants were babies with a CL/P requiring primary lip repair surgery (n=16) and adolescents with repaired CL/P who may require secondary lip revision surgery (n=32). The surgeon participants (n=8) were experienced in cleft care. Facial imaging data that included 2D images, 3D images, videos, and objective 3D visual modelling of facial movements were collected from each patient, and compiled as a collage termed the Standardized Assessment for Facial Surgery (SAFS) for systematic viewing by the surgeons.
INTERVENTIONS: The SAFS served as the intervention. Each surgeon viewed the SAFS for six distinct patients (two babies and four adolescents) and provided a list of surgical problems and goals. Then an in-depth-interview (IDI) was conducted with each surgeon to explore their decision-making processes. IDIs were conducted either in person or virtually, recorded, and then transcribed for qualitative statistical analyses using the Grounded Theory Method.
RESULTS: Rich narratives/themes emerged that included timing of the surgery; risks/limitations and benefits of surgery; patient/family goals; planning for muscle repair and scarring; multiplicity of surgeries and their impact; and availability of resources. For diagnoses/treatments, surgeons agreed, and level of surgical experience was not a factor.
CONCLUSIONS: The themes provided important information to populate a checklist of considerations to serve as a guide for clinicians.