Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2020
Voice disorders in severe obstructive sleep apnea patients and comparison of two acoustic analysis software programs: MDVP and Praat.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Wei Mei, Du Jianqun, Wang Xiaoyu, Lu Honghua, Wang Wei, Lin Peng
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were to explore the effect of obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS) on the voice by analyzing the acoustic parameters between patients with OSAHS and those without OSAHS and to compare acoustic analyses performed by two software programs (MDVP and Praat).
METHODS: Patients with OSAHS (n = 75) and normal controls (n = 46) were asked to produce a sustained sound of the vowel /i/ and were analyzed with electroglottography (EGG), MDVP, and Praat software. A self-rated scale (Voice Handicap Index, VHI-10) and acoustic parameters were compared.
RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in the fundamental frequency (F0), jitter, shimmer, noise/harmonic ratio (NHR), contact quotient perturbation (CQP), or contact index perturbation (CIP) between the patient group and the normal group. The VHI-10 values were significantly increased in patients with OSAHS. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis suggested that the shimmer obtained from MDVP and Praat possessed relatively high accuracy in differentiating patients with OSAHS from healthy individuals. The results for F0, jitter, shimmer, and NHR were significantly different between MDVP and Praat in OSAHS patients. In normal persons, there was a significant difference in NHR; however, no significant differences were found for F0, jitter, or shimmer between the two software programs. The results demonstrated that high correlations were found between values obtained by both software programs.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with OSAHS were prone to vibration irregularity, incomplete glottal closure, hoarseness, and other vocal problems. The two acoustic software programs present different values of acoustic measures. There was a strong correlation and consistency between the parameters calculated by the two software programs.
METHODS: Patients with OSAHS (n = 75) and normal controls (n = 46) were asked to produce a sustained sound of the vowel /i/ and were analyzed with electroglottography (EGG), MDVP, and Praat software. A self-rated scale (Voice Handicap Index, VHI-10) and acoustic parameters were compared.
RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in the fundamental frequency (F0), jitter, shimmer, noise/harmonic ratio (NHR), contact quotient perturbation (CQP), or contact index perturbation (CIP) between the patient group and the normal group. The VHI-10 values were significantly increased in patients with OSAHS. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis suggested that the shimmer obtained from MDVP and Praat possessed relatively high accuracy in differentiating patients with OSAHS from healthy individuals. The results for F0, jitter, shimmer, and NHR were significantly different between MDVP and Praat in OSAHS patients. In normal persons, there was a significant difference in NHR; however, no significant differences were found for F0, jitter, or shimmer between the two software programs. The results demonstrated that high correlations were found between values obtained by both software programs.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with OSAHS were prone to vibration irregularity, incomplete glottal closure, hoarseness, and other vocal problems. The two acoustic software programs present different values of acoustic measures. There was a strong correlation and consistency between the parameters calculated by the two software programs.