Christina Dastolfo1, Jackie Gartner-Schmidt2, Lan Yu3, Olivia Carnes3, Amanda I Gillespie2. 1. Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh Voice Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: dastolfoca@upmc.edu. 2. Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh Voice Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 3. Department of Audiology & Speech Pathology, Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania, Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The two goals of the present study were to (1) determine the ability of commonly used aerodynamic voice measures to capture change as a function of known interventions and (2) determine if certain aerodynamic measures demonstrate better responsiveness to change in specific disorder types than others. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective, longitudinal, single-blinded, cross-sectional study. METHODS: Patients (n = 70) with a single voice disorder diagnosis of benign vocal fold lesions (lesions), unilateral vocal fold paralysis (UVFP), primary muscle tension dysphonia (MTD-1), or vocal fold atrophy (atrophy) underwent baseline testing, a single intervention (phonosurgery or voice therapy), and follow-up testing. Common aerodynamic measurements were completed in repeated syllables and an all-voiced sentence. RESULTS: Statistically significant improvements were observed for two outcome measures, average airflow in syllables, and average airflow in the all-voiced sentence. Patients with lesions, UVFP, and MTD-1 improved in average airflow in the all-voiced sentence. Patients with UVFP also improved in airflow in syllables. CONCLUSIONS: Average airflow in the all-voiced sentence changed as a function of treatment for the lesion, MTD-1, and UVFP groups, demonstrating a disorder-specific pattern. Laryngeal airway resistance, and estimates of average subglottal pressure did not show significant change. Average airflow in the all-voiced sentence measurements is recommended as a routine voice measure, and further investigation of other aerodynamic measures' sensitivity to change is warranted.
OBJECTIVES: The two goals of the present study were to (1) determine the ability of commonly used aerodynamic voice measures to capture change as a function of known interventions and (2) determine if certain aerodynamic measures demonstrate better responsiveness to change in specific disorder types than others. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective, longitudinal, single-blinded, cross-sectional study. METHODS: Patients (n = 70) with a single voice disorder diagnosis of benign vocal fold lesions (lesions), unilateral vocal fold paralysis (UVFP), primary muscle tension dysphonia (MTD-1), or vocal fold atrophy (atrophy) underwent baseline testing, a single intervention (phonosurgery or voice therapy), and follow-up testing. Common aerodynamic measurements were completed in repeated syllables and an all-voiced sentence. RESULTS: Statistically significant improvements were observed for two outcome measures, average airflow in syllables, and average airflow in the all-voiced sentence. Patients with lesions, UVFP, and MTD-1 improved in average airflow in the all-voiced sentence. Patients with UVFP also improved in airflow in syllables. CONCLUSIONS: Average airflow in the all-voiced sentence changed as a function of treatment for the lesion, MTD-1, and UVFP groups, demonstrating a disorder-specific pattern. Laryngeal airway resistance, and estimates of average subglottal pressure did not show significant change. Average airflow in the all-voiced sentence measurements is recommended as a routine voice measure, and further investigation of other aerodynamic measures' sensitivity to change is warranted.
Authors: Victoria S McKenna; Manuel E Diaz-Cadiz; Adrianna C Shembel; Nicole M Enos; Cara E Stepp Journal: J Speech Lang Hear Res Date: 2019-04-15 Impact factor: 2.297
Authors: G Desuter; M Dedry; B Schaar; J van Lith-Bijl; P P van Benthem; E V Sjögren Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2017-12-20 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Katherine L Marks; Jonathan Z Lin; James A Burns; Tiffiny A Hron; Robert E Hillman; Daryush D Mehta Journal: J Speech Lang Hear Res Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 2.297
Authors: Ahmed Jorge; Christina Dastolfo-Hromack; Witold J Lipski; Ian H Kratter; Libby J Smith; Jackie L Gartner-Schmidt; R Mark Richardson Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2020-09-15 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Emke M J M van den Broek; Bas J Heijnen; Martine Hendriksma; Antonius P M Langeveld; Peter Paul G van Benthem; Elisabeth V Sjögren Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2019-03-11 Impact factor: 2.503