Literature DB >> 23946147

Automated acoustic analysis of task dependency in adductor spasmodic dysphonia versus muscle tension dysphonia.

Nelson Roy1, Alqhazo Mazin, Shaheen N Awan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Distinguishing muscle tension dysphonia (MTD) from adductor spasmodic dysphonia (ADSD) can be difficult. Unlike MTD, ADSD is described as "task-dependent," implying that dysphonia severity varies depending upon the demands of the vocal task, with connected speech thought to be more symptomatic than sustained vowels. This study used an acoustic index of dysphonia severity (i.e., the Cepstral Spectral Index of Dysphonia [CSID]) to: 1) assess the value of "task dependency" to distinguish ADSD from MTD, and to 2) examine associations between the CSID and listener ratings. STUDY
DESIGN: Case-Control Study.
METHODS: CSID estimates of dysphonia severity for connected speech and sustained vowels of patients with ADSD (n = 36) and MTD (n = 45) were compared. The diagnostic precision of task dependency (as evidenced by differences in CSID-estimated dysphonia severity between connected speech and sustained vowels) was examined.
RESULTS: In ADSD, CSID-estimated severity for connected speech (M = 39. 2, SD = 22.0) was significantly worse than for sustained vowels (M = 29.3, SD = 21.9), [P = .020]. Whereas in MTD, no significant difference in CSID-estimated severity was observed between connected speech (M = 55.1, SD = 23.8) and sustained vowels (M = 50.0, SD = 27.4), [P = .177]. CSID evidence of task dependency correctly identified 66.7% of ADSD cases (sensitivity) and 64.4% of MTD cases (specificity). CSID and listener ratings were significantly correlated.
CONCLUSION: Task dependency in ADSD, as revealed by differences in acoustically-derived estimates of dysphonia severity between connected speech and sustained vowel production, is a potentially valuable diagnostic marker.
© 2013 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ADSD; CSID; MTD; Task dependency

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23946147     DOI: 10.1002/lary.24362

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Laryngoscope        ISSN: 0023-852X            Impact factor:   3.325


  6 in total

1.  Acoustic Model of Perceived Overall Severity of Dysphonia in Adductor-Type Laryngeal Dystonia.

Authors:  Daniel P Buckley; Manuel Diaz Cadiz; Tanya L Eadie; Cara E Stepp
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2020-07-16       Impact factor: 2.297

2.  GALP Qualifier Scale: Initial Considerations to Classify a Voice Problem.

Authors:  Marina Englert; Viviana Mendoza; Mara Behlau; Marc De Bodt
Journal:  Folia Phoniatr Logop       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 0.849

3.  The Relationship Between Relative Fundamental Frequency and a Kinematic Estimate of Laryngeal Stiffness in Healthy Adults.

Authors:  Victoria S McKenna; Elizabeth S Heller Murray; Yu-An S Lien; Cara E Stepp
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Deep Brain Stimulation on Voice and Speech in Patients With Dystonia.

Authors:  Mary E Finger; Mustafa S Siddiqui; Amy K Morris; Kathryn W Ruckart; S Carter Wright; Ihtsham U Haq; Lyndsay L Madden
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2019-03-14       Impact factor: 2.009

5.  Detection of Vocal Fold Image Obstructions in High-Speed Videoendoscopy During Connected Speech in Adductor Spasmodic Dysphonia: A Convolutional Neural Networks Approach.

Authors:  Ahmed M Yousef; Dimitar D Deliyski; Stephanie R C Zacharias; Maryam Naghibolhosseini
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2022-03-15       Impact factor: 2.300

6.  Velopharyngeal Dystonia: An Unusual Focal Task-specific Dystonia?

Authors:  Amar S Patel; Lucian Sulica; Steven J Frucht
Journal:  Tremor Other Hyperkinet Mov (N Y)       Date:  2017-07-11
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.