Literature DB >> 23008330

Auditory-perceptual speech outcomes and quality of life after total laryngectomy.

Tanya L Eadie1, Adam M B Day, Devon E Sawin, Kristin Lamvik, Philip C Doyle.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: (1) To determine potential relationships between speech intelligibility, acceptability, and self-reported quality of life (QOL) after total laryngectomy and (2) to determine whether relationships are stronger when QOL is measured by a head and neck cancer-specific or discipline-specific QOL scale. STUDY
DESIGN: Cross-sectional.
SETTING: University-based laboratory and speech clinic. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twenty-five laryngectomized individuals completed disease-specific (University of Washington Quality of Life; UW-QOL) and discipline-specific (Voice Handicap Index-10; VHI-10) QOL scales. They also provided audio recordings that included the Sentence Intelligibility Test (SIT) and a reading passage. Thirty-three listeners transcribed the SIT sentences to yield intelligibility scores. Fifteen additional listeners judged speech acceptability of the reading passage using rating scales.
RESULTS: The QOL scores were moderate across the UW-QOL physical (mean = 77.63) and social-emotional (mean = 78.02) subscales and the VHI-10 (mean = 17.91). Speech acceptability and intelligibility varied across the samples, with acceptability only moderately related to intelligibility (r = 0.41, P < .05). Relationships were weak between ratings of intelligibility and self-reported QOL (range, r = 0.00-0.22) and weak to moderate between acceptability with QOL (range, r = 0.01-0.46). The only statistically significant, but moderate, relationship was found between speech acceptability with the UW-QOL speech subscore (r = 0.46, P < .05).
CONCLUSION: Listeners' ratings of speech acceptability and intelligibility were not strongly predictive of disease-specific or voice-related QOL, suggesting that listener-rated and patient-reported outcomes are complementary.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23008330      PMCID: PMC4374351          DOI: 10.1177/0194599812461755

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg        ISSN: 0194-5998            Impact factor:   3.497


  25 in total

1.  Acoustic and perceptual characteristics of esophageal and tracheoesophageal speech production.

Authors:  T Most; Y Tobin; R C Mimran
Journal:  J Commun Disord       Date:  2000 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.288

2.  Relationship of acoustic parameters and perceptual ratings of esophageal speech.

Authors:  M D Filter; M Hyman
Journal:  Percept Mot Skills       Date:  1975-02

3.  Acceptability ratings of normal, esophageal, and artificial larynx speech.

Authors:  S Bennett; B Weinberg
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1973-12

4.  Differences in speaking proficiencies in three laryngectomee groups.

Authors:  S E Williams; J B Watson
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol       Date:  1985-04

5.  Speech intelligibility and quality of life in head and neck cancer survivors.

Authors:  Tanya K Meyer; Joan C Kuhn; Bruce H Campbell; Anne M Marbella; Katherine B Myers; Peter M Layde
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 3.325

6.  Development and validation of the voice handicap index-10.

Authors:  Clark A Rosen; Annie S Lee; Jamie Osborne; Thomas Zullo; Thomas Murry
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  Voice handicap of laryngectomees with tracheoesophageal speech.

Authors:  Maria Schuster; Jörg Lohscheller; Ulrich Hoppe; Peter Kummer; Ulrich Eysholdt; Frank Rosanowski
Journal:  Folia Phoniatr Logop       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 0.849

8.  Assessment of quality of life in head and neck cancer patients.

Authors:  S J Hassan; E A Weymuller
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  1993 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.147

9.  The addition of mood and anxiety domains to the University of Washington quality of life scale.

Authors:  Simon N Rogers; Suzanne Gwanne; Derek Lowe; Gerry Humphris; Beven Yueh; Ernest A Weymuller
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.147

10.  Auditory-perceptual scaling and quality of life in tracheoesophageal speakers.

Authors:  Tanya L Eadie; Philip C Doyle
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 3.325

View more
  12 in total

1.  The relationship between acoustical and perceptual measures of vocal effort.

Authors:  Victoria S McKenna; Cara E Stepp
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Integrated rehabilitation after total laryngectomy: a pilot trial study.

Authors:  Ylenia Longobardi; Vezio Savoia; Francesco Bussu; Luciana Morra; Giorgia Mari; Domenico A Nesci; Claudio Parrilla; Lucia D'Alatri
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2019-01-26       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  The Effect of Noise on Relationships Between Speech Intelligibility and Self-Reported Communication Measures in Tracheoesophageal Speakers.

Authors:  Tanya L Eadie; Devon Sawin Otero; Susan Bolt; Mara Kapsner-Smith; Jessica R Sullivan
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 2.408

4.  The relationship between communicative participation and postlaryngectomy speech outcomes.

Authors:  Tanya L Eadie; Devon Otero; Steven Cox; Jordan Johnson; Carolyn R Baylor; Kathryn M Yorkston; Philip C Doyle
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 3.147

5.  Salvage total laryngectomy after external-beam radiotherapy: A 20-year experience.

Authors:  Vlad C Sandulache; Laura J Vandelaar; Heath D Skinner; Juan Cata; Katherine Hutcheson; Clifton David Fuller; Jack Phan; Zuhair Siddiqui; Stephen Y Lai; Randal S Weber; Mark E Zafereo
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2016-02-16       Impact factor: 3.147

6.  Talker identification across source mechanisms: experiments with laryngeal and electrolarynx speech.

Authors:  Tyler K Perrachione; Cara E Stepp; Robert E Hillman; Patrick C M Wong
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.297

7.  Prognostic factors of quality of life after transoral laser microsurgery for laryngeal cancer.

Authors:  Isabel Vilaseca; Manuel Bernal-Sprekelsen; Ruth Him; Alexandra Mandry; Eduardo Lehrer; José Luis Blanch
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-04-12       Impact factor: 2.503

8.  Surface Electromyography-Based Recognition, Synthesis, and Perception of Prosodic Subvocal Speech.

Authors:  Jennifer M Vojtech; Michael D Chan; Bhawna Shiwani; Serge H Roy; James T Heaton; Geoffrey S Meltzner; Paola Contessa; Gianluca De Luca; Rupal Patel; Joshua C Kline
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 2.297

Review 9.  Objective and subjective voice outcomes after total laryngectomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Klaske E van Sluis; Lisette van der Molen; Rob J J H van Son; Frans J M Hilgers; Patrick A Bhairosing; Michiel W M van den Brekel
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-10-31       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 10.  The electrolarynx: voice restoration after total laryngectomy.

Authors:  Rachel Kaye; Christopher G Tang; Catherine F Sinclair
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2017-06-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.