Evidence Hub

Speech therapy only versus speech therapy combined with Furlow palatoplasty for the treatment of velopharyngeal insufficiency in submucous cleft palate: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Tim F P Ritzen, Nina Wijnants, Maud J M Verbeek, Shauni A D Caenen-Drummen, S. V. van Kuijk, D. Booi, R. van der Hulst, Moustapha Hamdi et al.

Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, 2025

4 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review is to investigate the speech outcomes of speech therapy only versus speech therapy in combination with Furlow palatoplasty for the treatment of velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) in submucous cleft palate (SMCP).

DESIGN

Systematic review and 2 meta-analyses of speech therapy only and speech therapy in combination with Furlow palatoplasty in the treatment of VPI in SMCP.

SETTING

Secondary and tertiary care centres in 10 different countries spread over 6 continents.

PATIENTS, PARTICIPANTS

Articles were selected after an elaborate literature search using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library.

INTERVENTIONS

Speech therapy only and speech therapy in combination with Furlow palatoplasty MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome measure of this study is the reduction of VPI-associated speech difficulties after treatment.

RESULTS

Speech therapy only showed a risk difference (RD) of 0.015 to 0.036 for the presence of hypernasality; 0.045 for the presence of nasal emission; 0.015 for the presence of compensatory articulation and 0.089 for the presence of unintelligible speech. Speech therapy in combination with Furlow palatoplasty showed RDs of 0.46; 0.29 and 0.37 for the presence of hypernasality, clinically relevant hypernasality and nasal emission, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Both speech therapy only and speech therapy in combination with Furlow palatoplasty demonstrate a decrease in VPI-associated speech difficulties in SMCP. According to the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free