Voice quality of prepubescent children with quiescent recurrent respiratory papillomatosis

Clinical features, health‐related quality of life, and adult voice in juvenile‐onset recurrent respiratory papillomatosis

“…To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the quality of voice and stroboscopic findings in adults with a history of JORRP. One study of four prepubescent patients with JORRP in remission showed differences between patients and healthy controls in the acoustic and perceptual analysis of voice 13. Lehto et al showed that the voices of patients with adult‐onset RRP were not deviant when analyzed acoustically, but perceptual assessment showed pathologic voice quality 9.…”

“…When dealing with patients, cost‐benefit issues and adverse events of care have to be taken into account. One study has suggested that no significant differences exist in the voice‐related quality of life of prepubescent patients with JORRP in remission and healthy controls 13. Another study proposed that children with JORRP have poorer health‐related quality of life than do healthy controls and that their quality of life is similar to that of children with other chronic diseases.…”

Condições de trabalho, qualidade de vida e disfonia entre docentes

“…É necessário salientar que o QVV foi construído para auxiliar na quantificação da influência da disfonia no dia-a-dia do indivíduo e tem sido muito utilizado no acompanhamento da evolução do tratamento de pacientes 23,24,25,27,28,29 .…”

Perceptual Evaluation of Severe Pediatric Voice Disorders: Rater Reliability Using the Consensus Auditory Perceptual Evaluation of Voice

“…[20][21][22] To date, only one study systematically examined the reliability of expert perceptual ratings of voice in children using the CAPE-V. Krival et al 22 examined the relationship of vibratory source, vocal quality, and fundamental frequency (F 0 ) in a small cohort of children post-laryngotracheal reconstruction (LTR). Perceptual ratings provided by three experienced raters were collected for 16 participants with variable laryngeal vibratory sources (eg, glottic, supraglottic, mixed).…”