Adam D Rubin1, Cristina Jackson-Menaldi2, Lisa M Kopf3, Katherine Marks4, Jean Skeffington4, Mark D Skowronski5, Rahul Shrivastav6, Eric J Hunter7. 1. Lakeshore Ear, Nose, and Throat Center, Lakeshore Professional Voice Center, St. Clair Shores, Michigan; Department of Surgery, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, Michigan. Electronic address: arubin@lakeshoreent.com. 2. Lakeshore Ear, Nose, and Throat Center, Lakeshore Professional Voice Center, St. Clair Shores, Michigan; Department of Otolaryngology, School of Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan. 3. Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa. 4. Lakeshore Ear, Nose, and Throat Center, Lakeshore Professional Voice Center, St. Clair Shores, Michigan. 5. Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida. 6. Office of the Vice President for Instruction, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia. 7. Department of Communicative Sciences and Disorders, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The diagnoses of voice disorders, as well as treatment outcomes, are often tracked using visual (eg, stroboscopic images), auditory (eg, perceptual ratings), objective (eg, from acoustic or aerodynamic signals), and patient report (eg, Voice Handicap Index and Voice-Related Quality of Life) measures. However, many of these measures are known to have low to moderate sensitivity and specificity for detecting changes in vocal characteristics, including vocal quality. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare changes in estimated pitch strength (PS) with other conventionally used acoustic measures based on the cepstral peak prominence (smoothed cepstral peak prominence, cepstral spectral index of dysphonia, and acoustic voice quality index), and clinical judgments of voice quality (GRBAS [grade, roughness, breathiness, asthenia, strain] scale) following laryngeal framework surgery. METHODS: This study involved post hoc analysis of recordings from 22 patients pretreatment and post treatment (thyroplasty and behavioral therapy). Sustained vowels and connected speech were analyzed using objective measures (PS, smoothed cepstral peak prominence, cepstral spectral index of dysphonia, and acoustic voice quality index), and these results were compared with mean auditory-perceptual ratings by expert clinicians using the GRBAS scale. RESULTS: All four acoustic measures changed significantly in the direction that usually indicates improved voice quality following treatment (P < 0.005). Grade and breathiness correlated the strongest with the acoustic measures (|r| ~ 0.7) with strain being the least correlated. CONCLUSIONS: Acoustic analysis on running speech highly correlates with judged ratings. PS is a robust, easily obtained acoustic measure of voice quality that could be useful in the clinical environment to follow treatment of voice disorders.
INTRODUCTION: The diagnoses of voice disorders, as well as treatment outcomes, are often tracked using visual (eg, stroboscopic images), auditory (eg, perceptual ratings), objective (eg, from acoustic or aerodynamic signals), and patient report (eg, Voice Handicap Index and Voice-Related Quality of Life) measures. However, many of these measures are known to have low to moderate sensitivity and specificity for detecting changes in vocal characteristics, including vocal quality. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare changes in estimated pitch strength (PS) with other conventionally used acoustic measures based on the cepstral peak prominence (smoothed cepstral peak prominence, cepstral spectral index of dysphonia, and acoustic voice quality index), and clinical judgments of voice quality (GRBAS [grade, roughness, breathiness, asthenia, strain] scale) following laryngeal framework surgery. METHODS: This study involved post hoc analysis of recordings from 22 patients pretreatment and post treatment (thyroplasty and behavioral therapy). Sustained vowels and connected speech were analyzed using objective measures (PS, smoothed cepstral peak prominence, cepstral spectral index of dysphonia, and acoustic voice quality index), and these results were compared with mean auditory-perceptual ratings by expert clinicians using the GRBAS scale. RESULTS: All four acoustic measures changed significantly in the direction that usually indicates improved voice quality following treatment (P < 0.005). Grade and breathiness correlated the strongest with the acoustic measures (|r| ~ 0.7) with strain being the least correlated. CONCLUSIONS: Acoustic analysis on running speech highly correlates with judged ratings. PS is a robust, easily obtained acoustic measure of voice quality that could be useful in the clinical environment to follow treatment of voice disorders.
Authors: Yolanda D Heman-Ackah; Reinhardt J Heuer; Deirdre D Michael; Rosemary Ostrowski; Michelle Horman; Margaret M Baroody; James Hillenbrand; Robert T Sataloff Journal: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 1.547
Authors: Pasquale Bottalico; Juliana Codino; Lady Catherine Cantor-Cutiva; Katherine Marks; Charles J Nudelman; Jean Skeffington; Rahul Shrivastav; Maria Cristina Jackson-Menaldi; Eric J Hunter; Adam D Rubin Journal: J Voice Date: 2018-11-22 Impact factor: 2.009