Acta oto-laryngologica · 2010
Clinical phase I/feasibility study of the next generation indwelling Provox voice prosthesis (Provox Vega).
Клиническое исследованиеКлиническое исследование I фазыСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Hilgers Frans J M, Ackerstaff Annemieke H, van Rossum Maya, Jacobi Irene, Balm Alfons J M, Tan I Bing, van den Brekel Michiel W M
Аннотация
CONCLUSIONS: Provox Vega prostheses demonstrate good short-term feasibility, and their optimized airflow-resistance design offers laryngectomy patients indwelling voice prostheses with more choices in outer diameters without sacrificing (too) much in voice quality.
OBJECTIVES: Technological progress enables improvement of in vitro airflow characteristics of voice prostheses and design of voice prostheses with smaller outer diameters. This could potentially improve voice quality in users of Provox2, and avoid diminished voice quality in users of prostheses with smaller outer diameters.
METHODS: This was a prospective clinical phase I/feasibility study of three newly designed indwelling voice prostheses (Provox Vega 22.5 (Provox2 successor), 20, and 17Fr). Assessments consisted of patients' self-reported voice and speech, perceptual evaluation, acoustic analysis, maximum phonation time, loudness, speech rate, pull-out force and adaptation of the tracheoesophageal (TE) puncture to smaller diameter voice prostheses. Vega 22.5 was assessed in 15 patients (all Provox ActiValve users, observation period 3 weeks), and 16 patients with Vega 20/17 (2 weeks each).
RESULTS: No voice prostheses problems were encountered. Half of the patients with Vega 22.5 preferred that for its better voice quality. Voice and speech were considered equal to Provox2 for Vega 20, but slightly less for Vega 17. Most TE punctures adapted well to the smaller diameter voice prostheses.
OBJECTIVES: Technological progress enables improvement of in vitro airflow characteristics of voice prostheses and design of voice prostheses with smaller outer diameters. This could potentially improve voice quality in users of Provox2, and avoid diminished voice quality in users of prostheses with smaller outer diameters.
METHODS: This was a prospective clinical phase I/feasibility study of three newly designed indwelling voice prostheses (Provox Vega 22.5 (Provox2 successor), 20, and 17Fr). Assessments consisted of patients' self-reported voice and speech, perceptual evaluation, acoustic analysis, maximum phonation time, loudness, speech rate, pull-out force and adaptation of the tracheoesophageal (TE) puncture to smaller diameter voice prostheses. Vega 22.5 was assessed in 15 patients (all Provox ActiValve users, observation period 3 weeks), and 16 patients with Vega 20/17 (2 weeks each).
RESULTS: No voice prostheses problems were encountered. Half of the patients with Vega 22.5 preferred that for its better voice quality. Voice and speech were considered equal to Provox2 for Vega 20, but slightly less for Vega 17. Most TE punctures adapted well to the smaller diameter voice prostheses.