Comparison of corresponding scores From the cleft hearing appearance and speech questionnaire (CHASQ) and CLEFT-Q in Swedish patients with cleft lip and/or palate

Mia Stiernman, Kristina Klintö, Martin Persson, Magnus Becker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to compare corresponding scores between 2 existing cleft-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)-Cleft Hearing Appearance and Speech Questionnaire (CHASQ) and CLEFT-Q. The second aim of the study was to investigate patient opinion on the 2 PROMs.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional questionnaire study.

SETTING: Participants were recruited from a University Hospital. They answered CHASQ and CLEFT-Q either in the hospital or at home.

PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-three participants with cleft lip and/or palate, aged 10 to 19 years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: CHASQ and CLEFT-Q.

RESULTS: The CHASQ scores and the corresponding CLEFT-Q scores on appearance correlated significantly. Corresponding scores regarding speech did not correlate significantly. A majority, 15 (58%) participants, answered that they liked CLEFT-Q more than CHASQ, 18 participants (69%) thought CHASQ was easier to complete, and 19 (76%) thought CLEFT-Q would better inform health care professionals.

CONCLUSION: Both instruments showed strengths and limitations. Clinicians will have to consider each instrument's respective qualities when choosing to implement either PROM.

Original languageEnglish
JournalThe Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 2020

Swedish Standard Keywords

  • Health Sciences (303)
  • Surgery (30212)
  • Otorhinolaryngology (30218)

Keywords

  • CHASQ
  • CLEFT-Q
  • cleft lip and/or cleft palate
  • patient-reported outcomes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of corresponding scores From the cleft hearing appearance and speech questionnaire (CHASQ) and CLEFT-Q in Swedish patients with cleft lip and/or palate'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this