Auris, nasus, larynx · 2025
A scoping review on postoperative voice therapy for benign vocal fold lesions.
СтатьяScoping ReviewНазвание 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.
Dealino Maria Angela S, Ueha Rumi, Otsuka Mamiko, Kaneoka Asako, Goto Takao, Kondo Kenji
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to identify and map the available evidence on postoperative voice therapy specifically for vocal fold nodules, polyps, cysts, Reinke's edema, papilloma, and granuloma.
METHODS: This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews, 2018. A search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Cochrane databases was conducted using Medical Subject Headings when appropriate, free text, and Boolean operators. Two reviewers manually screened each record, and each report was considered based on the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The same reviewers manually reviewed the collected data from each report. The following data were collected from each paper after piloting a data collection form: first author, year, geographic location, study design, number of participants, vocal fold lesion studied, details of voice therapy, outcome measures, results, and conclusion.
RESULTS: The final number of articles included in the review was 22. The earliest article published included in the review was from 1988. Studies were clustered in certain geographic locations. Case series was the most frequent study design employed, and there was a dearth of experimental studies.
CONCLUSION: This scoping review reveals the paucity of literature on postoperative voice therapy techniques for benign vocal fold lesions. Standardization in outcome measures, use of multidimensional assessment, and improvement in reporting of interventions are needed. Strategies for postoperative voice therapy to improve voice function after phonosurgery have yet to be clearly established, and this is a clinical issue that needs to be addressed in the future.
METHODS: This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews, 2018. A search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Cochrane databases was conducted using Medical Subject Headings when appropriate, free text, and Boolean operators. Two reviewers manually screened each record, and each report was considered based on the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The same reviewers manually reviewed the collected data from each report. The following data were collected from each paper after piloting a data collection form: first author, year, geographic location, study design, number of participants, vocal fold lesion studied, details of voice therapy, outcome measures, results, and conclusion.
RESULTS: The final number of articles included in the review was 22. The earliest article published included in the review was from 1988. Studies were clustered in certain geographic locations. Case series was the most frequent study design employed, and there was a dearth of experimental studies.
CONCLUSION: This scoping review reveals the paucity of literature on postoperative voice therapy techniques for benign vocal fold lesions. Standardization in outcome measures, use of multidimensional assessment, and improvement in reporting of interventions are needed. Strategies for postoperative voice therapy to improve voice function after phonosurgery have yet to be clearly established, and this is a clinical issue that needs to be addressed in the future.