Table 1.
Sample characteristics and bivariate analyses examining the relationship between NAM preparation status and ratings of cleft severity and expected outcomes
| Outcome | Minimum Severity Clefts | Best Anticipated Surgical Outcome | Unlikely to Need Revision | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall % | 21.3 | 26.6 | 53.0 | |||||||||
| Cleft Type | Unilateral | Bilateral | Unilateral | Bilateral | Unilateral | Bilateral | ||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| % By Cleft Type | 27.8 | 15.7 | 33.7 | 20.6 | 64.6 | 43 | ||||||
| NAM Status | No NAM | NAM | No NAM | NAM | No NAM | NAM | No NAM | NAM | No NAM | NAM | No NAM | NAM |
|
| ||||||||||||
| % By Cleft Type and NAM status | 2.5 | 53.1 | 1.7 | 29.8 | 8.8 | 58.6 | 2.7 | 38.6 | 26.4 | 59.9 | 46.8 | 82.6 |
| Difference between patients with and without NAM | 50.6 | *** | 28.1 | *** | 49.8 | *** | 36 | *** | 33.5 | *** | 35.9 | *** |
Note:
***
p<0.001,