Virgilijus Uloza1, Ben Barsties V Latoszek2,3, Nora Ulozaite-Staniene4, Tadas Petrauskas1, Youri Maryn2,5,6,7. 1. Department of Otolaryngology, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania. 2. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium. 3. Institute of Health Studies, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Otolaryngology, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania. nora.ulozaite@lsmuni.lt. 5. European Institute for ORL, Sint-Augustinus Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium. 6. Department of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. 7. Faculty of Education, Health & Social Work, University College Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to investigate and compare the feasibility and robustness of the Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI) and the Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI) in diagnostic accuracy, differentiating normal and dysphonic voices. METHODS: A group of 264 subjects with normal voices (n = 105) and with various voice disorders (n = 159) were asked to read aloud a text and to sustain the vowel /a/. Both speech tasks were concatenated, and perceptually rated for dysphonia severity by five voice clinicians. They rated the Grade (G) and the overall dysphonia severity with a visual analog scale (VAS). All concatenated voice samples were acoustically analyzed to receive an AVQI score. For DSI analysis, the required voice parameters were obtained from the sustained phonation of the vowel /a/. RESULTS: The results achieved significant and marked concurrent validity between both auditory-perceptual judgment procedures and both acoustic voice measures. The DSI threshold (i.e., DSI = 3.30) pertaining to Gmean obtained reasonable sensitivity of 85.8% and specificity of 83.4%. For VASmean, the DSI threshold of 3.30 was determined also with reasonable sensitivity of 70.3% and excellent specificity of 93.9%. Also, the AVQI threshold (i.e., AVQI = 3.31) pertaining to Gmean demonstrated reasonable sensitivity of 78.1% and excellent specificity of 92.0%. For VASmean, an AVQI threshold of 3.33 was determined with excellent sensitivity of 97.0% and reasonable specificity of 81.8%. CONLUSION: The outcomes of the present study indicate comparable results between DSI and AVQI with a high level of validity to discriminate between normal and dysphonic voices. However, a higher level of accuracy was yielded for AVQI as a correlate of auditory perceptual judgment suggesting a reliable voice screening potential of AVQI.
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to investigate and compare the feasibility and robustness of the Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI) and the Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI) in diagnostic accuracy, differentiating normal and dysphonic voices. METHODS: A group of 264 subjects with normal voices (n = 105) and with various voice disorders (n = 159) were asked to read aloud a text and to sustain the vowel /a/. Both speech tasks were concatenated, and perceptually rated for dysphonia severity by five voice clinicians. They rated the Grade (G) and the overall dysphonia severity with a visual analog scale (VAS). All concatenated voice samples were acoustically analyzed to receive an AVQI score. For DSI analysis, the required voice parameters were obtained from the sustained phonation of the vowel /a/. RESULTS: The results achieved significant and marked concurrent validity between both auditory-perceptual judgment procedures and both acoustic voice measures. The DSI threshold (i.e., DSI = 3.30) pertaining to Gmean obtained reasonable sensitivity of 85.8% and specificity of 83.4%. For VASmean, the DSI threshold of 3.30 was determined also with reasonable sensitivity of 70.3% and excellent specificity of 93.9%. Also, the AVQI threshold (i.e., AVQI = 3.31) pertaining to Gmean demonstrated reasonable sensitivity of 78.1% and excellent specificity of 92.0%. For VASmean, an AVQI threshold of 3.33 was determined with excellent sensitivity of 97.0% and reasonable specificity of 81.8%. CONLUSION: The outcomes of the present study indicate comparable results between DSI and AVQI with a high level of validity to discriminate between normal and dysphonic voices. However, a higher level of accuracy was yielded for AVQI as a correlate of auditory perceptual judgment suggesting a reliable voice screening potential of AVQI.
Authors: P H Dejonckere; P Bradley; P Clemente; G Cornut; L Crevier-Buchman; G Friedrich; P Van De Heyning; M Remacle; V Woisard Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Gail B Kempster; Bruce R Gerratt; Katherine Verdolini Abbott; Julie Barkmeier-Kraemer; Robert E Hillman Journal: Am J Speech Lang Pathol Date: 2008-10-16 Impact factor: 2.408
Authors: F L Wuyts; M S De Bodt; G Molenberghs; M Remacle; L Heylen; B Millet; K Van Lierde; J Raes; P H Van de Heyning Journal: J Speech Lang Hear Res Date: 2000-06 Impact factor: 2.297
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