OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the correlation between the Voice Handicap Index (VHI) and objective voice measurements in patients with dysphonia of different origin. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Otolaryngology department in a university hospital. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: One hundred fifteen patients consulting for voice disorders were enrolled in the study: 32 presented with functional dysphonia (Group 1), 24 with unilateral vocal fold paralysis (Group 2), 30 with structural dysphonia (Group 3), and 29 with nodules (Group 4). From each patient, the maximum phonation time (MPT) and a voice spectrogram were obtained: patients with type 1 signal underwent perturbation analysis. Each patient completed the VHI. RESULTS: No significant difference across the four groups, in the VHI scores and voice measurements, was found. The correlation between the different voice measurements was good, while those between the VHI domains were very good. Considering the patients with type 1 signal (n = 80) all together, the correlations between VHI and voice laboratory measurements ranged between poor and good. Analyzing each patient group separately, good correlations were found between MPT and functional and physical VHI domain in Group 1 (r = 0.58 and 0.68), jitter and functional VHI domain in Group 2 (r = 0.61), MPT and functional VHI domain in Group 3 (r = 0.52), and physical VHI domain and jitter, shimmer, and noise-to-harmonic ratio in Group 4 (r = 0.58, 0.77, 0.76). CONCLUSION: The VHI and the voice laboratory measurements give independent information. However, the correlation between VHI and some laboratory measurements increases in populations with voice disorder of the same origin.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the correlation between the Voice Handicap Index (VHI) and objective voice measurements in patients with dysphonia of different origin. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Otolaryngology department in a university hospital. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: One hundred fifteen patients consulting for voice disorders were enrolled in the study: 32 presented with functional dysphonia (Group 1), 24 with unilateral vocal fold paralysis (Group 2), 30 with structural dysphonia (Group 3), and 29 with nodules (Group 4). From each patient, the maximum phonation time (MPT) and a voice spectrogram were obtained: patients with type 1 signal underwent perturbation analysis. Each patient completed the VHI. RESULTS: No significant difference across the four groups, in the VHI scores and voice measurements, was found. The correlation between the different voice measurements was good, while those between the VHI domains were very good. Considering the patients with type 1 signal (n = 80) all together, the correlations between VHI and voice laboratory measurements ranged between poor and good. Analyzing each patient group separately, good correlations were found between MPT and functional and physical VHI domain in Group 1 (r = 0.58 and 0.68), jitter and functional VHI domain in Group 2 (r = 0.61), MPT and functional VHI domain in Group 3 (r = 0.52), and physical VHI domain and jitter, shimmer, and noise-to-harmonic ratio in Group 4 (r = 0.58, 0.77, 0.76). CONCLUSION: The VHI and the voice laboratory measurements give independent information. However, the correlation between VHI and some laboratory measurements increases in populations with voice disorder of the same origin.
Authors: Nathan V Welham; Seong Hee Choi; Seth H Dailey; Charles N Ford; Jack J Jiang; Diane M Bless Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2011-05-06 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Beata Miaśkiewicz; Agata Szkiełkowska; Elżbieta Gos; Aleksandra Panasiewicz; Elżbieta Włodarczyk; Piotr H Skarżyński Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2018-08-28 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: César Álvarez-Marcos; Andrea Vicente-Benito; Águeda Gayol-Fernández; Daniel Pedregal-Mallo; Paloma Sirgo-Rodríguez; Liliana Santamarina-Rabanal; José Luis Llorente; Fernando López; Juan Pablo Rodrigo Journal: Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital Date: 2022-06 Impact factor: 2.618
Authors: Beata Miaśkiewicz; Elżbieta Gos; Małgorzata Dębińska; Aleksandra Panasiewicz-Wosik; Dorota Kapustka; Katarzyna Nikiel; Elżbieta Włodarczyk; Anna Domeracka-Kołodziej; Paulina Krasnodębska; Agata Szkiełkowska Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-08-29 Impact factor: 4.614