Nasoalveolar molding: benefits and burdens

4Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) has been glorified and maligned. Supporters argue that NAM improves cleft outcomes and reduces secondary procedures. Critics highlight the expense, labor intensity, and inconsistent or transient results. We offer NAM to our patients and have been doing so for over a decade; nevertheless, our benefits assessments are nuanced. In the following paper, we present our rationale, evolution, technique, and outcomes of NAM, augmented with an analysis of the literature. We offer another perspective in this ever-evolving area of evidence-based cleft palate care.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jalil, J., Bonanthaya, K., Parmar, R., & Bijapur, S. U. (2023). Nasoalveolar molding: benefits and burdens. Plastic and Aesthetic Research, 10. https://doi.org/10.20517/2347-9264.2022.55

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free