The Goslon yardstick applied to a consecutive series of patients with unilateral clefts of the lip and palate.

Frenchay Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom.
The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal (Impact Factor: 1.24). 12/1996; 33(6):494-6. DOI: 10.1597/1545-1569(1996)033<0494:TGYATA>2.3.CO;2
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT First described in 1987, the Goslon yardstick has been used since as a reliable and reproducible means of measuring dental arch relationships and, therefore, the quality of facial growth. The dental study models of a group of 32 consecutively treated patients with unilateral clefts of lip and palate, from the Frenchay Hospital, Bristol, U.K., were analyzed using the Goslon yardstick. More than 50% of the sample were in the unfavorable Goslon groups IV and V. Because of these results, we at Frenchay Hospital now base our related surgical procedures on the early vomerine closure of the anterior hard palate without nasal or alveolar repair at 3 months, followed by primary hard and soft palate closure at 6 months.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: To compare and evaluate longitudinally the dental arch relation-ships from 4.5 to 13.5 years of age with the Bauru-BCLP Yardstick in a large sample of patients with bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP). Design: Retrospective longitudinal intercenter outcome study. Patients: Dental casts of 204 consecutive patients with complete BCLP were evaluated at 6, 9, and 12 years of age. All models were identified only by random identification numbers. Setting: Three cleft palate centers with different treatment protocols. Main Outcome Measures: Dental arch relationships were categorized with the Bauru-BCLP yardstick. Increments for each interval (from 6 to 9 years, 6 to 12 years, and 9 to 12 years) were analyzed by logistic and linear regression models. Results: There were no significant differences in outcome measures between the centers at age 12 or at age 9. At age 6, center B showed significantly better results (p = .027), but this difference diminished as the yardstick score for this group increased over time (linear regression analysis), the difference with the reference category (center C, boys) for the intervals 6 to 12 and 9 to 12 years being 10.4% (p = .041) and 12.9% (p = .009), respectively. Conclusions: Despite different treatment protocols, dental arch relationships in the three centers were comparable in final scores at age 9 and 12 years. Delaying hard palate closure and employing infant orthopedics did not appear to be advantageous in the long run. Premaxillary osteotomy employed in center B appeared to be associated with less favorable development of the dental arch relationship between 9 and 12 years.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the surgical outcomes of patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP) operated on by a single surgeon of the cleft reference center of the Lauro Wanderley University Hospital at the Federal University of Paraiba. Forty-four individuals' dental casts diagnosed with CUCLP, born between 1995 and 2002, mean age of 11 years, were evaluated by three calibrated orthodontic specialists and scored by the Great Ormond Street, London and Oslo (GOSLON) yardstick on two occasions. The scores were compared with those observed in other centers around the world. The Kappa test was applied to evaluate the intra- and inter-examiner agreement. Descriptive statistics was applied for the GOSLON yardsticks core. The mean GOSLON score was 2.75. For the GOSLON yardstick, 43.2 % of the sample presented scores 1 and 2, 31.8 % had score 3, and 25 % were with scores 4 and 5. There was very good intra- and inter-examiner Kappa agreement in the application of the GOSLON yardstick. The data suggest favorable outcomes, with 75 % of cases with no need of orthognathic surgery. The Kappa values confirmed the high reproducibility of the GOSLON yardstick.
    Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 07/2013;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Several indices are now available to assess the severity of the malocclusion in cleft lip and/or palate (CLP) patients; and although it has been quite some time since the introduction of these indices, there is no consensus as to which index should be used for CLP populations.OBJECTIVE:To systematically review the available literature on the indices used to assess the occlusal schemes in dental models of CLP patients, with respect to the most commonly used index and the index that most fulfils the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria.SEARCH METHODS:Ten electronic databases, grey literature, and reference list searches were conducted.SELECTION CRITERIA:The inclusion criteria consisted of studies that aimed to assess a particular malocclusion index on study models of patients with CLP.DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Full articles were retrieved from abstracts/titles that appeared to have met the inclusion -exclusion criteria which were subsequently reviewed using more detailed criteria for a final selection decision. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool was used to appraise the methodological quality of the finally included studies. Due to the heterogeneity of the data, only a qualitative analysis was performed.RESULTS:A total of 13 studies met the inclusion -exclusion criteria. These studies revealed seven utilized indices, namely the GOSLON Yardstick, Five-Year-Old, Bauru-Bilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Yardstick, Huddart -Bodenham, Modified Huddart -Bodenham, EUROCRAN Yardstick, and GOAL Yardstick. The GOSLON Yardstick was the most commonly used index, and the Modified Huddart -Bodenham performed the best according to the WHO criteria.CONCLUSIONS:Current evidence suggests that the Modified Huddart -Bodenham Index equalled or outperformed the rest of the indices on all the WHO criteria and that the GOSLON Yardstick was the most commonly used index, possibly due to a longer time in use. Therefore, the Modified Huddart -Bodenham could be considered as the standard to measure outcomes of patients with CLP.
    The European Journal of Orthodontics 03/2013; · 1.53 Impact Factor