This article describes the methodology used for the Pediatric Craniofacial Collaborative Group (PCCG) Consensus Conference.
This is a novel Consensus Conference of national experts in Pediatric Craniofacial Surgery and Anesthesia, who will follow standards set by the Institute of Medicine and using the Research and Development/University of California, Los Angeles appropriateness method, modeled after the Pediatric Critical Care Transfusion and Anemia Expertise Initiative. Topics related to pediatric craniofacial anesthesia for open cranial vault surgery were divided into twelve subgroups with a systematic review of the literature.
A group of 20 content experts met virtually between 2019 and 2020 and will collaborate in their selected topics related to perioperative management for pediatric open cranial vault surgery for craniosynostosis. These groups will also identify where future research is needed.
Experts in pediatric craniofacial surgery and anesthesiology are developing recommendations on behalf of the Pediatric Craniofacial Collaborative Group for perioperative management of patients undergoing open cranial vault surgery for craniosynostosis and identifying future research priorities.

BACKGROUND: Apert Syndrome is a congenital condition characterised by primary craniosynostosis, midfacial malformations and complex symmetrical malformations of the hands and feet. The hands demonstrate one of the most complex collections of congenital upper limb deformities, posing a significant challenge for the paediatric hand surgeon. This study examines the extant literature and current practice of the four UK specialist craniofacial units regarding the management of Apert hands in order to provide a basis for guideline development.
METHODS: The current literature was reviewed. Survey-type questionnaires were distributed to the four UK specialist craniofacial units and responses analysed.
RESULTS: Management of the Apert hand is largely dictated by the degree of malformation present. Although all units aim to achieve a five digit hand, variation in the timing of surgery, operative protocols and mobilisation policies exist.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study provide an interesting snapshot of the current management of Apert hands across four UK craniofacial surgery units. The four UK units remain congruent on most areas surrounding the management of Apert hands although some minor inter-unit variation exists. A multidisciplinary approach to management remains fundamental in optimising the regain of function and aesthetically acceptable hands.

BACKGROUND: Systematic review evidence is increasing within craniofacial surgery. Compliance with recognised reporting guidelines for systematic review evidence has not been assessed.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the compliance of systematic reviews published in craniofacial journals with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting criteria.
UNASSIGNED: Thomson Reuters impact factor was used to identify three top craniofacial journals. A search for all systematic review articles published in these journals from 1st May 2010 to 30th April 2015 was conducted using MEDLINE PubMed.
METHODS: Two independent researchers assessed each study for inclusion and performed the data extraction. Data included the article reference information; the pathology and interventions examined and compliance of each review article with the PRISMA checklist.
UNASSIGNED: 97 studies were returned by the search. 62 studies proceeded to data extraction. The mean percentage of applicable PRISMA items that were met across all studies was 72.5% (range 28.6-96.2%). The area of poorest compliance was with the declaration of a study protocol (19.4% of studies). Only 37.1% of studies declared their source of funding.
CONCLUSIONS: Compliance of systematic review articles within craniofacial surgery with areas of the PRISMA checklist could be improved.