Temporal Characteristics of Aerodynamic Segments in the Speech of Children and Adults

Abstract

Objectives The primary purpose of this study was to determine the temporal characteristics of aerodynamic segments in the normal speech of children and adults without cleft palate. A secondary objective was to determine the withinspeaker variability of the segments. Method Speakers consisted of 46 children aged 6 to 8 years, 41 older children aged 11 to 12 years, and 41 adults aged 18 to 37 years (total n = 128) who repeated the word “hamper” during continuous utterances. The pressure-flow method was used to determine the duration of six segments of the oral air pressure and nasal airflow pulses associated with the /mp/ sequence. Descriptive statistics, including coefficients of variation (COV), were computed for each segment as a function of age and sex of the speakers. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedures were used to determine the effects of age, sex, or both on the temporal variables. Results ANOVAs indicated statistically significant main effects (p < .008) for age on five of the six temporal measures and for sex on three of the six measures. Five of the six COVs were also statistically significant for age. There were no statistically significant interactions between speaker age and sex for any measure. Conclusions The results indicate distinct patterns of timing for aerodynamic segments of speech produced by children and adults. Overall, adults exhibited less temporal variability than children. The generally longer and more variable segments produced by children suggest diagnostic and treatment implications relative to speakers with velopharyngeal dysfunction.

A Preliminary Investigation of Velopharyngeal Timing in Normally Developing Preschool Children and Those with Speech Sound Disorders

“…The data indicated an inclination toward decreases in the duration of the timing measures as chronological age increased, which is consistent with previous findings on articulatory maturity in the jaw and lip (Rvachew & Brosseau, 2018;Walsh & Smith, 2002;Green, Moore, & Reilly, 2002). Generally, the peak oral air pressure and nasal airflow findings were similar to the values found in other studies (Zajac & Hackett, 2002;Zajac, 2000). These findings provide a model for studying the timing variables of velopharyngeal closure when conducting an aerodynamic evaluation with children who do not present with VPI (Zajac & Hackett, 2002;Zajac, 2000;Leeper et al, 1998).…”

“…Generally, the peak oral air pressure and nasal airflow findings were similar to the values found in other studies (Zajac & Hackett, 2002;Zajac, 2000). These findings provide a model for studying the timing variables of velopharyngeal closure when conducting an aerodynamic evaluation with children who do not present with VPI (Zajac & Hackett, 2002;Zajac, 2000;Leeper et al, 1998). Zajac (2000) conducted an additional study with normal speakers that consisted of children and adults.…”

“…These variables can be combined to evaluate different movement patterns of the velopharyngeal mechanism (Warren et al, 1993). Zajac and Hackett (2002) used the pressure-flow technique to examine velopharyngeal function in 128 typically developing speakers: 46 of the participants were between 6-8 years of age, 41 were between 11-12 years of age, and 41 were between 18-37 years of age. In this study, six temporal parameters were measured while the word "hamper" was produced five times in continuous speech: beginning of nasal airflow-end nasal airflow, beginning of nasal airflow-peak of oral pressure, beginning of nasal airflow-end of oral pressure, peak nasal airflow-peak of oral pressure, beginning of oral pressure-peak of oral pressure, and the beginning of oral pressure-the end of oral pressure.…”

“…Measurement: Figure 1-2 is taken from Zajac and Hackett (2002) and shows the measurement parameters that were used to measure the aerodynamic parameters. There were six measurement points that were used to quantify the temporal relationships of interest and they included: (1) Duration of nasal airflow (1-3), (2) Start of nasal airflow to peak oral pressure for /p/ (1-5), (3) Start of nasal airflow to cessation of oral pressure for /p/ (1-6), (4) Maximum nasal airflow during /m/ to maximum oral pressure for /p/ (2-5), (5) Initiation of oral pressure to maximum oral pressure for /p/ (4-5), and (6) initiation of oral pressure to cessation of oral pressure for /p/ (4-6).…”

Instrumental Assessment of Velopharyngeal Closure for Speech

“…Pressure-flow measurements using aerodynamic instrumentation are obtained at some clinics, although they seem to be more valued for research than for daily clinical applications. [19][20][21][22] Aerodynamic measures are particularly useful when there is interest in detailed understanding of the aerodynamics of the oral pressure consonant productions, which are critical to speech intelligibility. 23,24 Acquisition of these measurements is technically complex and, like nasopharyngoscopy, requires considerable cooperation from the patient.…”