Clinical Characteristics and Acoustic Analysis Results of Dysphonic Patients Admitted to Ankara University ENT Clinic
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the epidemiologic, clinical and prognostic features and acoustic analysis results of dysphonia patients admitted to Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Otorhinolaryngology Outpatient Clinic with complaints of hoarseness. Materials and Methods: Among 427 patients who applied to the outpatient clinic between May 2013 and May 2014, 185 patients who met the study criteria were included in the study. Demographic information, clinical diagnoses, voice quality evaluations, videolaryngostroboscopic findings and acoustic analysis data were obtained. Pre- and post-treatment data were compared statistically. Results: Among the patients included in the study, 53.5% were female and 46.5% were male; the most common causes of dysphonia were polyps (14.59%), functional dysphonia (10.81%) and reflux laryngitis (9.19%); the most common closure pattern in videolaryngostroboscopic examination was complete closure (25.95%). Voice therapy was planned for 46.5% of the patients, surgery for 42.2%, and medical treatment for 7.6%. A significant decrease was observed in GRBAS, Voice Handicap Index and Voice-Related Quality of Life Scale scores after treatment (p<0.05). In men, the decrease in fundamental frequency was statistically significant (p<0.05), but the changes in acoustic parameters such as jitter, shimmer, NNE, HNR were not statistically significant (p>0.05). Conclusion: The combined use of subjective and objective measures in the evaluation of dysphonia patients provides significant benefits in the diagnosis and treatment process. In our study, significant improvements were observed in both subjective and objective parameters with the treatments applied. Multidisciplinary approach increases the effectiveness of dysphonia management.
Keywords
voice disorders, acoustic analysis, voice therapy, dysphonia, GRBAS, videolaryngotroboscopy
References
- Cohen SM, Kim J, Roy N, Asche C, Courey M. Prevalence and causes of dysphonia in a large treatment-seeking population. Laryngoscope. 2012;122(2):343-348.
- Cohen SM. Self-reported impact of dysphonia in a primary care population: an epidemiological study. Laryngoscope. 2010;120(10):2022-2032.
- Johns MM, Sataloff RT, Merati AL, Rosen CA. Shortfalls of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery's Clinical practice guideline: Hoarseness (Dysphonia). Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;143(2):175-177.
- Reghunathan S, Bryson PC. Components of Voice Evaluation. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2019;52(4):589-595.
- Stachler RJ, Francis DO, Schwartz SR, et al. Clinical Practice Guideline: Hoarseness (Dysphonia) (Update). Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018;158: S1-S42.
- Francis DO, Smith LJ. Hoarseness Guidelines Redux: Toward Improved Treatment of Patients with Dysphonia. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2019;52(4):597-605.
- Roy N, Merrill RM, Gray SD, Smith EM. Voice disorders in the general population: prevalence, risk factors, and occupational impact. Laryngoscope. 2005;115(11):1988-1995.
- Jones K, Sigmon J, Hock L, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for voice problems among telemarketers. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2002;128(5):571-577.
- Long J, Williford HN, Olson MS, Wolfe V. Voice problems and risk factors among aerobics instructors. J Voice. 1998;12(2):197-207.
- Davids T, Klein AM, Johns MM. Current dysphonia trends in patients over the age of 65: is vocal atrophy becoming more prevalent? Laryngoscope. 2012;122(2):332-335.