Literature DB >> 26168902

Efficiency and Cutoff Values of Self-Assessment Instruments on the Impact of a Voice Problem.

Mara Behlau1, Glaucya Madazio2, Felipe Moreti3, Gisele Oliveira2, Luciana de Moraes Alves Dos Santos2, Bruna Rabelo Paulinelli2, Euro de Barros Couto Junior2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficiency of four self-assessment questionnaires that rate the impact of a voice problem on the individual's life: Voice-Related Quality of Life (V-RQOL), the original and reduced versions of the Voice Handicap Index (VHI) and VHI-10, Vocal Performance Questionnaire (VPQ), and Voice Symptom Scale (VoiSS).
METHODS: Data from 975 subjects, 486 with a diagnosis of dysphonia and 489 vocally healthy individuals, were submitted to the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to obtain the cutoff values that determine the discriminating power of these instruments (presence of dysphonia vs healthy voice).
RESULTS: The ROC curve analysis showed that the most efficient questionnaires were the VoiSS and the VHI. Results showed that they presented as a perfect classification based on their efficiency, specificity, and sensitivity values (all three of them = 1). The VHI-10 and the V-RQOL showed excellent classification (VHI-10: efficiency = 0.991; specificity = 1; sensitivity = 0.981; V-RQOL: efficiency = 0.914; specificity = 0.860; sensitivity = 0.967). Finally, the VPQ showed a good level of classification (efficiency = 0.828; specificity = 0.824; sensitivity = 0.831). The cutoff values for the instruments are as follows: VoiSS = 16 points, VHI = 19 points, VHI-10 = 7.5 points, V-RQOL = 91.25, and VPQ = 20.5 points. These values are important for screening large populations as well as for helping in the decision-making process of clinical management. The cutoff values for maximum sensitivity and specificity of the instruments that did not produce perfect classification are as follows: VHI-10: sensitivity = 5; specificity = 7.5, V-RQOL: sensitivity = 86.25; specificity = 98.75, and VPQ: sensitivity = 15.5; specificity = 31.5.
CONCLUSIONS: Both the VoiSS and the VHI are perfect classifiers. The VHI-10 and the V-RQOL are excellent classifiers, and the VPQ is good at discriminating individuals with dysphonia from the ones without dysphonia.
Copyright © 2016 The Voice Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dysphonia; Protocols; Self-assessment; Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences; Validation studies; Voice

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26168902     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2015.05.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Voice        ISSN: 0892-1997            Impact factor:   2.009


  16 in total

1.  Self-perception of quality of life in patients with functional voice disorders: the effects of psychological and vocal acoustic variables.

Authors:  Mafalda Andrea; Mario Andrea; Maria Luísa Figueira
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2018-08-16       Impact factor: 2.503

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.  Relationship of cepstral analysis with voice self-assessments in dysphonic and normal speakers.

Authors:  Saeed Saeedi; Mahshid Aghajanzadeh; Seyyedeh Maryam Khoddami; Payman Dabirmoghaddam; Shohreh Jalaie
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2022-10-13       Impact factor: 3.236

4.  What Type of Incision for Anterior Cervical Spine Surgery Involving Long Segments Can Bring Better Cosmetic and Functional Outcomes?

Authors:  Hyung Rae Lee; Dong-Ho Lee; Sang Yun Seok; Sehan Park; Jae Hwan Cho; Chang Ju Hwang; Choon Sung Lee
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2022-05-13

5.  Effects and Changes on Voice After Rhinoplasty: A Long-Term Report.

Authors:  Giuseppe Guarro; Francesco Brunelli; Barbara Rasile; Carmine Alfano
Journal:  Plast Surg (Oakv)       Date:  2019-04-08       Impact factor: 0.947

6.  Evaluation of the Correlation Between Turkish Voice Handicap Index-10 and Turkish Voice-Related Quality of Life Scale.

Authors:  Berna Deniz Kuntman; Mustafa Şahin; Mehmet Fatih Öğüt
Journal:  Turk Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2018-09-01

7.  Checking for voice disorders without clinical intervention: The Greek and global VHI thresholds for voice disordered patients.

Authors:  Dionysios Tafiadis; Spyridon K Chronopoulos; Meropi E Helidoni; Evangelia I Kosma; Louiza Voniati; Periklis Papadopoulos; Thomas Murry; Nafsika Ziavra; George A Velegrakis
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-06-27       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  The relationship between biomechanics of pharyngoesophageal segment and tracheoesophageal phonation.

Authors:  Teng Zhang; Ian Cook; Michał Szczęśniak; Julia Maclean; Peter Wu; Duong Duy Nguyen; Catherine Madill
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Injection laryngoplasty as adjunct treatment method for muscle tension dysphonia: Preliminary findings.

Authors:  Daniel Novakovic; Duong Duy Nguyen; Antonia Chacon; Catherine Madill
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2019-07-30       Impact factor: 3.325

10.  Monitoring the Outcome of Phonosurgery and Vocal Exercises with Established and New Diagnostic Tools.

Authors:  Matthias Seipelt; Andreas Möller; Tadeus Nawka; Ute Gonnermann; Felix Caffier; Philipp P Caffier
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-01-23       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.