STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY

This scoping review will provide a comprehensive overview of the evidence related to digital resources for healthcare professionals to monitor patients with cleft lip and/or palate.

This scoping review will adhere to the guidelines of the Joanna Briggs Institute and employ the Scoping Review extension for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidance, adopting a rigorous methodology.

The outcome of this scoping review will depend on the information available at the time of analysis; if precise, complete or updated information is lacking, the review may be constrained in its scope and accuracy.

Introduction

Cleft lip and/or palate (CL+/-P) is characterised as a congenital malformation that simultaneously affects the lip and palate. Although the exact cause of the condition is unknown, there is consensus around the interaction between genetic and environmental factors as triggers of this anomaly.1 As a congenital malformation, the diagnosis of CL+/-P can be made during the prenatal monitoring phase, through imaging exams such as ultrasound and MRI. The latter, in particular, is recognised for its accuracy in the fetal diagnosis of CL+/-P.2

On a global scale, the prevalence of cleft lip is 0.3 per 1000 live births, cleft palate is 0.33 per live birth and labiopalatal cleft is 0.45 per 1000 live births.3 Regarding treatment, the patient with this condition faces a long journey guided by a multidisciplinary team that ideally should start working during the prenatal phase.4 In this lengthy journey, it is crucial for the team to maintain continuous monitoring and follow-up with the patient since other issues may arise as a result of the condition, such as a higher incidence of dental caries and dental anomalies.5 Beyond dental issues, patients may experience challenges related to speech and swallowing alterations, hearing issues, nutritional deficiencies and psychosocial problems.6

With that in mind, it is important to map out which tools are available and can be used by the multidisciplinary team for monitoring and following up these patients. However, no literature addressing this perspective was found in the databases or record platforms. In this context, the aim of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the scientific literature concerning the evidence related to digital resources and technologies, such as mobile applications or telemedicine platforms, aimed at monitoring and following up patients with CL+/-P. This approach seeks to ensure a comprehensive analysis of the various tools used, regardless of the specific characteristics of the patients under monitoring.

Methods and analysis

To conduct the proposed scoping review, we will use the methodological framework recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Manual,7 which outlines five stages for scoping reviews. Additionally, for the final study reporting, we will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist for scoping reviews.8

Research question

For the formulation of the research question, we have adopted the PCC acronym (Population, Concept and Context), as recommended by the JBI guidelines. Thus, the following elements have been established as generators of interest for the study: Population (P): Patients with CL+/-P; Concept (C): monitoring; Context (C): digital resources and technologies applied to monitoring and follow-up for the improvement in the quality of life of cleft patients. The established research question is:

Study selection

To select studies, eligibility criteria aligned with the PCC acronym, as described in table 1, will be used. Studies in English, Portuguese or Spanish, irrespective of the publication date, will be eligible for inclusion.

Table 1

Eligibility criteria for studies, according to the Patient/Concept/Context strategy used

Search strategy

For the review process, the search strategy will be developed in three stages: (1) initial search, (2) database-specific adaptations and (3) manual search, taking into account the specificities of each database. The first stage involves searching in the PubMed and Web of Science (WoS) databases using Medical Subject Headings descriptors to identify articles on the topic and refine the search strategy. In the second stage, considering the specific characteristics of each database, adjustments will be made to meet the objectives of each one. Finally, in the third stage, a manual search will be conducted in the reference lists of the selected articles to ensure that all relevant articles on the topic are included. Searches will be conducted in the following databases: PubMed, WoS, Scopus, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, ScienceDirect, as well as in grey literature indexed in ProQuest Open Access Dissertations & Theses and Google Scholar. It is worth noting that the entire process of developing the search strategy will be supervised by a librarian to ensure its compliance with the guidelines outlined in the JBI manual. A description of the initial search strategy is available as online supplemental material for this protocol.

Data extraction

Searches will be conducted in May 2024, on a single day, across all databases. The selected studies for the review will be exported to the reference management software EndNote Basic (Clarivate Analytics, USA) to remove duplicates. Subsequently, the studies will be exported to the Rayyan-Intelligent Systematic Review software (Qatar Computing Research Institute), where two blind and independent reviewers will assess and read the title and abstract. If the study aligns with the review, the full material will be read, and inclusion or exclusion of the work will be determined. In cases of disagreement, a third reviewer will be consulted for the final decision.

Analysis and presentation of data

At the end of the study selection, the data will be extracted and tabulated in an electronic spreadsheet using Google Sheets, where they will be organised and analysed. The information to be collected is described in table 2. Subsequently, the data will be analysed, and the results will be presented through a descriptive narrative method. Finally, the results will be compared with the relevant scientific literature.

Table 2

Information to be collected from selected studies

Study registration

This protocol has been registered on the Open Science Framework – Registration (https://osf.io/) with the DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/Y6AG8.

Patient and public involvement

None.

Ethics statementsPatient consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethics approval

Not applicable.