Rehabilitation of the laryngectomee

Martin, Hayes

doi:10.1002/1097-0142(196307)16:7<823::aid-cncr2820160702>3.0.co;2-j

Cited by 31 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A report by Wynder et al (1956) showed that during a recent 10-year period, there had been a 75% increase in the occurrence of larynx cancer as compared t o a 42% increase in the mortality due t o the disease. In addition, Martin (1963) cited surveys which indicated an increase of 55% in the incidence of total laryngectomy in the United States between 1947 and1952. It is now estimated that 2500-4000 laryngectomies are performed each year in Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, New York. the United States, with about 25,000 laryngectomees alive in this country today (Diedrich and Youngstrom, 1966). Cancer of the larynx occurs most frequently in the 50t o 70-year age group and is nine times more common in men than in women (Holinger et aE., 1957).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological considerations in the attainment of esophageal speech

Dibartolo

1971

Journal of Surgical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In view of the increasing incidence and decreasing mortality due to larynx cancer, the constant 2: 1 ratio of esophageal speakers to nonspeakers among laryngectomees, and the widespread argeement that psychological factors are prime considerations in esophageal speech attainment, the investigation was designed to delineate certain psychological, physical, and sociological variables which might relate to attainment of alaryngeal speech. Ninety-four male laryngectomees responded to the Tennessee Self-concept Scale, the IPAT Anxiety Scale Questionnaire, and a standardized personal interview including a voice recording. Five variables (self-concept, bodyconcept, anxiety level, age at surgery, and defensive distortion of self-concept responses) were found to be significant in differentiating groups of nonesophageal, below-average, average, and above-average esophageal speakers. A significant difference in self-concept and body-concept appeared between the two high and the two low speaker groups. The below-average speakers were more anxious than were the average speakers or the above-average speakers. The above-average speakers were younger in age at surgery than were the subjects in the other three groups. The higher self-concept and body-concept scores of the better speakers may have been a function of a defense mechanism, as indicated by their defensive distortion scores which were higher than those of the below-average group. It was found that the variables of selfconcept, body-concept, and anxiety were ahout three times more influential than those of age at surgery and defensive distortion in identifying groups of speakers. The conclusions warranted were that necessary psychological counseling and immediate postoperative use of an artificial larynx before the institution of esophageal speech therapy would help raise the ratio of esophageal to nonesophageal speakers.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological considerations in the attainment of esophageal speech

Dibartolo

1971

Journal of Surgical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gardner (1978) and Shanks (1977) (Diedrich, 1968;Gardner, 1978;Greene, 1957;Hyman, 1971Hyman, , 1979Kallen, 1934;Luchsinger & Arnold, 1965;Salmon, 1971;Shanks, 1979;Snidecor, 1968;Waldrop, 1956). Diedrich and Youngstrom (1966), Martin (1963), and Shanks (1977Shanks ( , 1979 have speculated on the possible etiology of klunking noise. Diedrich and Youngstrom (1966) have published empirical evidence which appears to associate the production of klunking noises with a particular method of esophageal air intake.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When intra-oral air pressure is sufficient to push the bolus past the PE segment, the esophagus is partially inflated. Martin (1963) states the probable cause of intake noise is the inability of the speaker to sufficiently relax the PE segment, which may act as a sphincter. Greene (1957), Hyman (1971), and Salmon (1971) suggest that excessive muscular tension of perhaps one or more of the oral structures may contribute to unwanted noise production.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several investigators mention the considerable diff icul ty of eliminating klunking, once established (Diedrich, 1971;Gardner, 1978;Martin, 1963;Salmon, 1971;Shanks, 1977). Martin (1963) states that intake noise production is probably related to anatomic and physiologic differences in those speakers who produce such sounds.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Martin (1963) states that intake noise production is probably related to anatomic and physiologic differences in those speakers who produce such sounds. Martin suggests even a qualified speech instructor is unlikely to correct the problem.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Correlates of sophisticated listener judgments of esophageal air intake noise

Eccleston¹

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature on esophageal speech has identified the problem of extraneous air intake noise, suggested its possible etiology, and provided practical advice for clinical management. Documentation on the efficacy of specific methodology is lacking in the literature. Such documentation'would be simplified if objective criteria were used to 2 rate the severity of intake noise. The present study was prompted by the lack of basic data regarding listener evaluation of intake noise.The purpose of this study was to identify physical and perceptual correlates of acceptability of esophageal air intake noise. A primary and a secondary question were asked: Twenty-four laryngectomees, ranging widely in esophageal speaking ability, read a standard passage for audio tape recording. Four expert voice clinicians listened to the tapes, rating subjects on the acceptability of air intake noise. Overall esophageal speech proficiency ratings 3 for eighteen of the subjects were obtained from an independent study conducted during the same week.Five objective measures of esophageal speech were extracted from each speech sample, using a real-time intensity display instrument and a storage oscilloscope.Interjudge and intrajudge reliability were determined by computing Pearson product-moment correlation coeff icients. The means of the ratings on intake noise acceptability were entered in a multiple regression analysis as the criterion variable, with the objective measurements and the overall speech proficiency ratings as the predictor variables.Three of the predictor variables were found to be positively correlated with the air intake acceptability ratings beyond the .01 level of significance: the number of syllables uttered per air intake, the mean intensity of intake, and the rate of speech. The ratio of mean speech intensity to mean intake noise intensity was correlated to intake noise acceptability at the .OS level. Neither mean speech intensity nor the overall esophageal speech proficiency variables were significantly correlated with intake noise acceptability. The number of syllables uttered per intake accounted for the largest share of the variance of intake noise acceptability. Mean intake intensity was the second, but far weaker predictor of variance. The remaining variables accounted for a very slight percentage of the total variance.

show abstract