Received by the Editorial Office: July 04, 2026
Accepted for publication: August 07, 2026
Published online: September 30, 2026
UDC: 616.314-089.23:616.322-089-053.2
IRSTI: 76.29.55
DOI: 10.70113/1815-9443.2026.81.64.004
ONE-YEAR OUTCOMES OF INTERDISCIPLINARY REHABILITATION IN CHILDREN FOLLOWING ADENOTOMY: A PROSPECTIVE CONTROLLED STUDY USING OMES AND OSA-18
E.K. Ilyassova¹*, M.K. Iskakova², U.A. Kuvatbayeva¹
¹Kazakh-Russian Medical University, Almaty, Kazakhstan
² Asfendiyarov Kazakh National Medical University, Almaty, Kazakhstan
*Corresponding author
Introduction: Orofacial myofunctional disorders are common among children, particularly following adenotomy, and may manifest as persistent mouth breathing, infantile swallowing, and abnormal tongue posture. Despite the high prevalence of these functional impairments, current postoperative guidelines do not routinely include orthodontic follow-up. Increasing evidence suggests that interdisciplinary rehabilitation involving orthodontic assessment and myofunctional management may improve functional recovery. Therefore, evaluating the outcomes of a comprehensive interdisciplinary approach in children following adenotomy is of significant clinical importance.
Aim: To evaluate the outcomes of an interdisciplinary comprehensive approach in the rehabilitation of children with adenoid hypertrophy following adenotomy.
Materials and methods: This prospective controlled comparative study included 80 six-year-old boys with Class II malocclusion who had previously undergone adenotomy. Participants were allocated to a study group (n=40), which received orthodontic treatment combined with orofacial myofunctional therapy and speech-language intervention, and a comparison group (n=40), which received orthodontic treatment alone. All participants underwent clinical and radiographic orthodontic assessment, the Orofacial Myofunctional Evaluation with Scores (OMES) protocol, and the Obstructive Sleep Apnea-18 (OSA-18) questionnaire. Outcomes were assessed one year after treatment initiation. Between-group post-treatment comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test; p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results: Children receiving the interdisciplinary rehabilitation protocol had better post-treatment orofacial myofunctional and OSA-18 outcomes than those receiving orthodontic treatment alone. The reported total OMES score was higher in the study group than in the comparison group (34.8 vs. 21.6; p<0.001). The median OSA-18 score was lower in the study group (22.0 [21.0-23.0] vs. 25.0 [24.0-27.0]; p<0.001), indicating lower symptom burden and better health-related quality of life.
Discussion: The findings support an association between interdisciplinary rehabilitation and better one-year functional and quality-of-life outcomes in this selected cohort. Because allocation procedures and baseline OMES/OSA-18 values are not reported in the manuscript, the results should be interpreted as comparative post-treatment outcomes rather than definitive causal effects.
Conclusions: In six-year-old boys with Class II malocclusion after adenotomy, interdisciplinary rehabilitation combining orthodontic treatment, orofacial myofunctional therapy, and speech-language intervention was associated with better one-year OMES and OSA-18 outcomes than orthodontic treatment alone. Larger studies with clearly described allocation procedures, baseline measurements, and longer follow-up are warranted.
Key words: orofacial myofunctional disorders, dentofacial anomalies, adenoid hypertrophy, interdisciplinary rehabilitation, orthodontic treatment, Class II malocclusion, OSA-18, OMES, orthodontics.
