Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2024
Clinical Effects of Voice Therapy on Vocal Outcomes in Unilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis: Proof-of-Concept Study for Two SOVT-Based Treatment Protocols.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kissel Imke, Meerschman Iris, D'haeseleer Evelien, Papeleu Tine, Tomassen Peter, Claeys Sofie, Leyns Clara, Van Nuffelen Gwen, Van Lierde Kristiane
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Studies on treatment efficacy in unilateral vocal fold paralysis (UVFP) often lack a predetermined treatment protocol, and little is known about the effects of specific vocal techniques on vocal outcomes and quality of life in UVFP patients. The purpose of this preliminary proof-of-concept study is to investigate the effects and feasibility of two intensive treatment protocols based on water-resistance therapy (WRT) and vocal function exercises (VFE).
METHODS: Ten participants with acute or chronic UVFP/paresis were recruited in the study and randomly assigned to the WRT or VFE group. Three of these participants presented with aphonia and could not complete the program as prescribed. The remaining participants completed an intensive therapy program with the assigned vocal technique. Before, during, and after the program, a multidimensional voice assessment was performed. Maximum phonation time, acoustic, perceptual, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were obtained.
RESULTS: WRT and VFE had positive clinical effects on instrumental and auditory-perceptual voice quality, glottal closure, and PROMs, but interindividual variability was high. Studies with larger sample sizes are necessary to confirm or refute these findings.
CONCLUSION: The WRT- and VFE-based therapy programs are both feasible and seem to elicit positive clinical changes in UVFP patients. Suggestions on how to improve the programs are provided, as well as considerations for implementation in clinical practice. Follow-up research is needed to examine the efficacy of both programs on group level.
METHODS: Ten participants with acute or chronic UVFP/paresis were recruited in the study and randomly assigned to the WRT or VFE group. Three of these participants presented with aphonia and could not complete the program as prescribed. The remaining participants completed an intensive therapy program with the assigned vocal technique. Before, during, and after the program, a multidimensional voice assessment was performed. Maximum phonation time, acoustic, perceptual, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were obtained.
RESULTS: WRT and VFE had positive clinical effects on instrumental and auditory-perceptual voice quality, glottal closure, and PROMs, but interindividual variability was high. Studies with larger sample sizes are necessary to confirm or refute these findings.
CONCLUSION: The WRT- and VFE-based therapy programs are both feasible and seem to elicit positive clinical changes in UVFP patients. Suggestions on how to improve the programs are provided, as well as considerations for implementation in clinical practice. Follow-up research is needed to examine the efficacy of both programs on group level.