Aerodynamic Patterns in Patients With Voice Disorders: A Retrospective Study

Gilman, Marina; Petty, Brian; Maira, C. Proietti; Pethan, Madeleine; Wang, Lijia; Hapner, Edie R.; Johns, Michael M.

doi:10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.11.001

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Gillespie, Gartner-Schmidt, Rubinstein, and Abbott (2013) expanded upon that work by employing estimates of Ps and glottal airflow to identify distinct subgroups of 90 women with nonphonotraumatic vocal hyperfunction based on aerodynamic profiles of combinations of high and low airflow and pressure that reflected differences in average laryngeal resistance. Gilman et al (2017) corroborated these findings in a larger study of 192 patients with various voice disorders, noting that mean Ps was significantly higher across the patient group compared to that of a healthy control group. Espinoza, Zañartu, Van Stan, Mehta, and Hillman (2017) found that, across aerodynamic measures obtained, SPLnormalized estimates of Ps were the most salient measures in discriminating patients with phonotraumatic or nonphonotraumatic vocal hyperfunction from matched healthy controls.…”

Section: Clinical Utility Of Subglottal Pressure Estimationsupporting

confidence: 73%

Impact of Nonmodal Phonation on Estimates of Subglottal Pressure From Neck-Surface Acceleration in Healthy Speakers

Marks

Lin

Fox

et al. 2019

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of nonmodal phonation on estimates of subglottal pressure (Ps) derived from the magnitude of a neck-surface accelerometer (ACC) signal and to confirm previous findings regarding the impact of vowel contexts and pitch levels in a larger cohort of participants. Method Twenty-six vocally healthy participants (18 women, 8 men) were asked to produce a series of p-vowel syllables with descending loudness in 3 vowel contexts (/a/, /i/, and /u/), 3 pitch levels (comfortable, high, and low), and 4 elicited phonatory conditions (modal, breathy, strained, and rough). Estimates of Ps for each vowel segment were obtained by averaging the intraoral air pressure plateau before and after each segment. The root-mean-square magnitude of the neck-surface ACC signal was computed for each vowel segment. Three linear mixed-effects models were used to statistically assess the effects of vowel, pitch, and phonatory condition on the linear relationship (slope and intercept) between Ps and ACC signal magnitude. Results Results demonstrated statistically significant linear relationships between ACC signal magnitude and Ps within participants but with increased intercepts for the nonmodal phonatory conditions; slopes were affected to a lesser extent. Vowel and pitch contexts did not significantly affect the linear relationship between ACC signal magnitude and Ps. Conclusion The classic linear relationship between ACC signal magnitude and Ps is significantly affected when nonmodal phonation is produced by a speaker. Future work is warranted to further characterize nonmodal phonatory characteristics to improve the ACC-based prediction of Ps during naturalistic speech production.

show abstract

Section: Clinical Utility Of Subglottal Pressure Estimationsupporting

confidence: 73%

Impact of Nonmodal Phonation on Estimates of Subglottal Pressure From Neck-Surface Acceleration in Healthy Speakers

Marks

Lin

Fox

et al. 2019

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The voice evaluation techniques assessed in the different included studies are highly heterogeneous. In 10 of the studies [12,15,16,20,21,[23][24][25]28] only acoustic parameters were registered, two included only aerodynamic parameters [13,22], and in seven [14][15][16][17][18]26,27,29,30] both parameters were recorded. Only one study assessed the acoustic parameters together with the myoelectric activity [19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Subglottic pressure has an important role in normal voice production and direct importance in the evaluation of laryngeal function [32]. Statistically significant differences were observed in subglottic pressure between the group with vocal pathology compared to the group without vocal pathology [22] and between genders [30]. Men with vocal pathology were also found to have higher subglottic pressure and glottic resistance compared to women with vocal pathology and shorter maximum phonation time [18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 1 shows the summary of the methodology used in the 19 studies included in the review. In most of them, a sample made up of two groups was observed: an experimental group made up of people with vocal pathology and a control group made up of people without vocal pathology [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. Another three were made up of a group of volunteers with vocal pathology [26][27][28] and two more were composed of volunteers without vocal pathology [29,30].…”

Section: Study Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the studies where the aerodynamic parameters were evaluated, the repetition of the syllable [pa] [18,22,26,30] or the syllable [pi] [14,29] was used.…”

Section: Study Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Acoustic, Myoelectric, and Aerodynamic Parameters of Euphonic and Dysphonic Voices: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: At present, there is no clinical consensus on the concept of normal and dysphonic voices. For many years, the establishment of a consensus on the terminology related to normal and pathological voices has been studied, in order to facilitate the communication between professionals in the field of the voice. Aim: systematically review the literature to compare and learn more precisely the measurable and objective characteristics of the acoustic, aerodynamic and surface electromyographic parameters of the normal and dysphonic voices. Methods: The PRISMA 2020 methodology was used as a review protocol together with the PICO procedure to answer the research question through six databases. Results: In total, 467 articles were found. After duplicate records were removed from the selection, the inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied and 19 articles were eligible. A qualitative synthesis of the included studies is presented in terms of their methodology and results. Conclusions: Studying the acoustic, aerodynamic, and electromyographic parameters with more precision, in both normal and dysphonic voices, will allow health professionals working in the field of voice (speech therapy, otorhinolaryngology, phoniatrics, etc.) to establish a diagnostic and detailed consensus of the vocal pathology, enhancing the communication and generalization of results worldwide.

show abstract