A Comparison of Vocal Function between Females with Benign Vocal Fold Lesions and Females with Normal Voices by Use of Electroglottograph
Keywords:
benign vocal fold lesions, electroglottograph, vocal functionAbstract
Objective: To compare vocal function between females with benign vocal fold lesions, and females with normal voices by use of electroglottograph (EGG), also in addition to determining which EGG parameters were significantly correlated with the perceptual degree of dysphonia.
Material and Methods: EGG data were obtained from 32 females with benign vocal fold lesions and 32 females with normal voices. The EGG parameter values were analyzed from their productions of four sustained vowels (/a:/, /u:/, /i:/, and /æ:/).
Results: The two perturbation measures of EGG signals, EGG-jitter and EGG-shimmer of females with benign vocal fold lesions were significantly higher than those of normal females at a p-value<0.01 for all four vowels. EGG-SDF0 of females with benign vocal fold lesions were significantly higher than those of normal females at a p-value<0.01 for /i:/, and /æ:/. EGG-F0 of females with benign vocal fold lesions were significantly lower than those of normal females at a p-value<0.01 for /u:/, /i:/, and /æ:/. The differences in contact quotient were non-significant on all four sustained vowels between the two groups. In addition, EGG-SDF0 was found to be significantly correlated with the perceptual degree of dysphonia for four sustained vowels.
Conclusion: The results of this study showed the differences between vocal function of females with benign vocal lesions and females with normal voices, using EGG parameters. Furthermore, EGG-SDF0 could be used as an indicator for the degree of severity of dysphonia in females with benign vocal fold lesions.
References
Herrington-Hall BL, Lee L, Stemple JC, Niemi KR, McHone MM. Description of laryngeal pathologies by age, sex, and occupation in a treatment-seeking sample. J Speech Hear Disord 1988;53:57-64.
Dobres R, Lee L, Stemple JC, Kummer AW, Kretschmer LW. Description of laryngeal pathologies in children evaluated by otolaryngologists. J Speech Hear Disord 1990;55:526-32.
Boone DR, McFarlane SC, Von Berg SL. The voice and voice therapy. Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon; 2005.
Aronson AE, Bless DM. Clinical voice disorders. New York: Thieme; 2009.
Altman KW. Benign vocal lesions-nodules, polyps, cysts [monograph on the Internet]. Northwestern Medicine® and Northwestern Memorial Health Care; 2016 [cited 2016 Jan 15]. Available from: http://ent.nm.org/uploads/2/4/3/7/ 24375049/otolaryngology.voice.benignvocallesions.pdf
Colton RH, Casper JK, Leonard R. Understanding voice problems: a physiological perspective for diagnosis and treatment. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2011.
Ferrand CT. Voice disorders: scope of theory and practice. Boston: Pearson; 2012.
Stemple JC, Glaze LE, Klaben B. Clinical voice pathology: theory and management. San Diego: Singular Pub. Group; 2000.
Roseberry-McKibbin C, Hegde MN. An advanced review of speech-language pathology: preparation for PRAXIS and comprehensive examination. Austin, Tex.: PRO-ED; 2006.
Baken RJ, Orlikoff RF. Clinical measurement of speech and voice. 2nd ed. San Diego: Singular Thomson Learning; 2000.
Kitzing P. Clinical applications of electroglottography. J Voice 1990;4:238-49.
Kitzing P. Electroglottography. In: Ferlito A, editor. Diseases of the larynx. London: Arnold; 2000;p.127-38.
Seepuaham C. A comparison of vocal function between females with benign vocal fold lesions and females with normal voice by using Electroglottograph [Dissertation]. Bangkok: Faculty of Graduate Studies, Mahidol University; 2019.
Dejonckere PH, Lebacq J. Electroglottography and vocal nodules. An attempt to quantify the shape of the signal. Folia Phoniatr (Basel) 1985;37:195-200.
Hall KD. Variations across time in acoustic and electroglottographic measures of phonatory function in women with and without vocal nodules. J Speech Hear Res 1995;38:783-93.
Lim JY, Choi JN, Kim KM, Choi HS. Voice analysis of patients with diverse types of Reinke’s edema and clinical use of electroglottographic measurements. Acta Otolaryngol 2006;126:62-9.
Hosokawa K, Yoshida M, Yoshii T, Takenaka Y, Hashimoto M, Ogawa M, et al. Effectiveness of the computed analysis of electroglottographic signals in muscle tension dysphonia. Folia Phoniatr Logop 2012;64:145-50.
Dejonckere PH, Remacle M, Fresnel-Elbaz E, Woisard V, Crevier-Buchman L, Millet B. Differentiated perceptual evaluation of pathological voice quality: reliability and correlations with acoustic measurements. Revue Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord) 1996;117:219-24
Franco D. Acoustic and perceptual parameters of voice quality relating to sagittal postural alignment: a study of the preliminary results of normal and dysphonic Portuguese speakers. Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the Student Organization of Linguistics in Europe; 2014 Jan 8-10; Leiden: Leiden University Centre for Linguistics; 2014;p.95-113.
Sindermsuk D. The survey of speech defects among prathom 4 students in Mitsampan School Group [Dissertation]. Bangkok: Faculty of Graduate Studies, Mahidol University; 1986.
Rosner B. Fundamentals of biostatistics. 7th ed. Boston: Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning; 2010.
Zemlin WR. Speech and hearing science: anatomy and physiology. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1981.
Raphael LJ, Borden GJ, Harris KS. Speech science primer: physiology, acoustics, and perception of speech. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2011.
Titze IR. Interpretation of the electroglottographic signal. J Voice 1990;4:1-9.
Colton RH, Conture EG. Problems and pitfalls of electroglottography. J Voice 1990;4:10-24.
Titze IR. Workshop on acoustic voice analysis: summary statement [monograph on the Internet]. Iowa: National Center for Voice and Speech; 1995 [cited 2018 Jun 20]. Available from: http://www.ncvs.org/freebooks/summary-statement.pdf
Orlikoff RF. Assessment of the dynamics of vocal fold contact from the electroglottogram data from normal male subjects. J Speech Hear Res 1991;34:1066-72.
Howard D. Electroglottography/electrolaryngography. In: Fried MP, Ferlito A, editors. The larynx. 3rd ed. San Diego: Plural Press; 2009;p.227-43.
Howard DM, Lindsey GA, Allen B. Toward the quantification of vocal efficiency. J Voice 1990;4:205-12.
Shah RK, Woodnorth GH, Glynn A, Nuss RC. Pediatric vocal nodules: correlation with perceptual voice analysis. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2005;69:903-9.
Hosokawa K, Ogawa M, Hashimoto M, Inohara H. Statistical analysis of the reliability of acoustic and electroglottographic perturbation parameters for the detection of vocal roughness. J Voice 2014;28:263-16.
Winstanley S, Wright H. Vocal fold contact area patterns in normal speakers: an investigation using the electrolaryngograph interface system. Br J Disord of Commun 1991; 26:25-39.
Ma EP, Love AL. Electroglottographic evaluation of age and gender effects during sustained phonation and connected speech. J Voice 2010;24:146-52.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
