3.9 Article

Null Association Between Isolated Orofacial Clefts and Sleep Duration: A Cohort Study From the Japan Environment and Children's Study

Journal

CLEFT PALATE-CRANIOFACIAL JOURNAL
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/10556656221128425

Keywords

sleep duration; orofacial clefts; cohort study

Funding

  1. Ministry of Environment, Japan

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found no associations between isolated orofacial clefts and sleep duration in children at different ages. Children with isolated orofacial clefts had adequate sleep duration.
Objectives: Although children with orofacial clefts have an increased risk for sleep-disordered breathing, no studies have examined the association of sleep duration. Thus, this study aimed to examine associations between orofacial clefts and sleep duration at 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years of age in Japan. Design: A cohort study from the Japan Environment and Children's Study. Setting and Patients: This study consisted of 91 497 children, including ones with isolated cleft lip and palate (n = 69), isolated cleft lip only (n = 48), and isolated cleft palate only (n = 37), for which recruitment was undertaken during 2011 to 2014. Main Outcome Measures: Seep durations (hours per day) at 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years of age, as reported by their mothers. Results: In the control group, mean sleep durations and standard deviations at 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years of age were 15.2 (2.5), 13.6 (1.9), 12.9 (1.6), and 11.6 (1.2) h, respectively. Compared to the control group, linear regression models reported effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals shorter than 1 h for sleep duration of each type of isolated orofacial cleft at each time point. Conclusions: This study suggested null associations between isolated orofacial clefts and sleep duration at 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years of age. Children with isolated orofacial clefts had sufficient mean sleep duration.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available