OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether amplitude or temporal patterns of oral-nasal balance differentiate speakers with cleft palate who are classified as belonging to the "almost but not quite" (ABNQ) and "sometimes but not always" (SBNA) subgroups of marginal velopharyngeal inadequacy. DESIGN: The nasal accelerometric vibrational index (NAVI) was used to measure amplitude and temporal aspects of oral-nasal balance during the productions of oral and nasal syllables, words, and sentences. NAVI measures obtained include mean amplitude, time integral (area under the curve), duration, rise time, and fall time. SETTING: Tertiary care center for patients with cleft palate-craniofacial anomalies. PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen patients with repaired cleft palate who were assigned by perceptual assessment to the ABNQ subgroup and 17 patients who were assigned to the SBNA subgroup. RESULTS: No differences were found between the ABNQ and SBNA subgroups with regard to patterns of nasalization. Further analysis as a function of level of production and phonetic context revealed no differences between the subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Although clinicians may report perceived differences in the resonance patterns of speakers who fall within the category of marginal velopharyngeal inadequacy, further division into the ABNQ and SBNA subgroups has yet to be validated.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether amplitude or temporal patterns of oral-nasal balance differentiate speakers with cleft palate who are classified as belonging to the "almost but not quite" (ABNQ) and "sometimes but not always" (SBNA) subgroups of marginal velopharyngeal inadequacy. DESIGN: The nasal accelerometric vibrational index (NAVI) was used to measure amplitude and temporal aspects of oral-nasal balance during the productions of oral and nasal syllables, words, and sentences. NAVI measures obtained include mean amplitude, time integral (area under the curve), duration, rise time, and fall time. SETTING: Tertiary care center for patients with cleft palate-craniofacial anomalies. PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen patients with repaired cleft palate who were assigned by perceptual assessment to the ABNQ subgroup and 17 patients who were assigned to the SBNA subgroup. RESULTS: No differences were found between the ABNQ and SBNA subgroups with regard to patterns of nasalization. Further analysis as a function of level of production and phonetic context revealed no differences between the subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Although clinicians may report perceived differences in the resonance patterns of speakers who fall within the category of marginal velopharyngeal inadequacy, further division into the ABNQ and SBNA subgroups has yet to be validated.