Incomes to Outcomes: A Global Assessment of Disparities in Cleft and Craniofacial Treatment

Abstract

ObjectiveRecent investigations focused on health equity have enumerated widespread disparities in cleft and craniofacial care. This review introduces a structured framework to aggregate findings and direct future research.DesignSystematic review was performed to identify studies assessing health disparities based on race/ethnicity, payor type, income, geography, and education in cleft and craniofacial surgery in high-income countries (HICs) and low/middle-income countries (LMICs). Case reports and systematic reviews were excluded. Meta-analysis was conducted using fixed-effect models for disparities described in three or more studies.SettingN/APatientsPatients with cleft lip/palate, craniosynostosis, craniofacial syndromes, and craniofacial trauma.InterventionsN/AResultsOne hundred forty-seven articles were included (80% cleft, 20% craniofacial; 48% HIC-based). Studies in HICs predominantly described disparities (77%,) and in LMICs focused on reducing disparities (42%). Level II-IV evidence replicated delays in cleft repair, alveolar bone grafting, and cranial vault remodeling for non-White and publicly insured patients in HICs (Grades A-B). Grade B-D evidence from LMICs suggested efficacy of community-based speech therapy and remote patient navigation programs. Meta-analysis demonstrated that Black patients underwent craniosynostosis surgery 2.8 months later than White patients ( P < .001) and were less likely to undergo minimally-invasive surgery (OR 0.36, P = .002).ConclusionsDelays in cleft and craniofacial surgical treatment are consistently identified with high-level evidence among non-White and publicly-insured families in HICs. Multiple tactics to facilitate patient access and adapt multi-disciplinary case in austere settings are reported from LMICs. Future efforts including those sharing tactics among HICs and LMICs hold promise to help mitigate barriers to care.