DOI 10.1590/2317-1782/e20250175pt
Screening and analysis of the risk of dysphonia based on general and specific screening protocols in teachers with and without voice disorders.
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To assess the risk of dysphonia in teachers with and without voice disorders, compare the scores of the screening protocols, and correlate the risks with the overall severity of voice disorder.
METHODS
Teachers from different education levels and institutions, of both sexes, aged over 18 years, participated in the study. The study applied the General Dysphonia Risk Screening Protocol (PRRD-G) and the Specific Dysphonia Risk Screening Protocol for Teachers (PRRD-Pro) and recorded and analyzed voice samples. Participants were divided into two groups, with and without voice disorders, based on the mean overall severity in the Consensus Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice (CAPE-V). Descriptive analyses and comparisons of the protocol data between the groups were performed.
RESULTS
The groups were homogeneous regarding sex and age. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in PRRD-G, PRRD-Pro, and total scores. The smoking subscore was worse in the group with voice disorders, and hydration was worse in the group without disorders. There was no correlation between the overall severity and the protocol scores.
CONCLUSION
The mean PRRD-G scores were above the cutoff in both groups, indicating a high risk of dysphonia, even in the absence of voice disorders. Smoking and hydration were relevant in differentiating between teachers with and without voice disorders. The study is planned to continue with a larger sample size, laryngological examination, observation of voice and communication in the classroom, vocal improvement workshops, and speech therapy.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.