Logopedics, phoniatrics, vocology · 2020
Investigating voice differences in teachers with and without self-reported voice disorders, and healthcare workers without self-reported voice disorders.
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.
Trinite Baiba
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The present study had two objectives: (1) to investigate differences in voice parameters between teachers with and without self-reported voice disorders and (2) to find differences in voice parameters between teachers and healthcare workers without self-reported voice disorders.
METHOD: Three respondents' groups were formed: teachers with self-reported voice disorders (mean age, 47 years; range, 34-60 years), teachers without self-reported voice disorders (46; 27-64), and healthcare workers without self-reported voice disorders (45; 31-63). All participants were women. Maximum Phonation Time (MPT), fundamental frequency (F0), jitter, shimmer, frequency and intensity range, Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI), Voice Handicap Index-30 (VHI), and perceived stress (PSS) were assessed in respondents.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine percent of teachers noted two or more vocal symptoms daily or weekly. Teachers with self-reported voice disorders had a higher degree of perceived stress (18 vs. 13, p = .009), higher score on the VHI (25 vs. 13, p = .001), and lower score on the DSI (2.65 vs. 3.21, p = .037), than teachers without self-reported voice disorders. The VHI-30 score of 15 points could be a cut off value describing voice disorders in female teachers. Differences between teachers and health care workers without self-reported voice disorders were found in MPT (p = .001), F0 (p = .012), jitter (p = .009), DSI (p = .023), and the perceived stress score (p = .041).
CONCLUSIONS: The teaching profession can influence the voice, and the presence of psycho-emotional factors can lead to the development of voice disorders in teachers.
METHOD: Three respondents' groups were formed: teachers with self-reported voice disorders (mean age, 47 years; range, 34-60 years), teachers without self-reported voice disorders (46; 27-64), and healthcare workers without self-reported voice disorders (45; 31-63). All participants were women. Maximum Phonation Time (MPT), fundamental frequency (F0), jitter, shimmer, frequency and intensity range, Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI), Voice Handicap Index-30 (VHI), and perceived stress (PSS) were assessed in respondents.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine percent of teachers noted two or more vocal symptoms daily or weekly. Teachers with self-reported voice disorders had a higher degree of perceived stress (18 vs. 13, p = .009), higher score on the VHI (25 vs. 13, p = .001), and lower score on the DSI (2.65 vs. 3.21, p = .037), than teachers without self-reported voice disorders. The VHI-30 score of 15 points could be a cut off value describing voice disorders in female teachers. Differences between teachers and health care workers without self-reported voice disorders were found in MPT (p = .001), F0 (p = .012), jitter (p = .009), DSI (p = .023), and the perceived stress score (p = .041).
CONCLUSIONS: The teaching profession can influence the voice, and the presence of psycho-emotional factors can lead to the development of voice disorders in teachers.