Investigation of Female Individuals Acoustic and Electroglottographic Parameters with Respect to Body Mass Index

Öz

Aim: The aim of this study is to examine the relationships between Multi-Dimensional Voice Program (MDVP) and Electroglottograph (EGG) measurement results of female individuals that are grouped according to their body mass index (BMI). Material and Methods: 96 women who are at the ages between 18-25 have participated.Participants were divided into 4 BMI groups; weak (n=20), normal (n=29), overweight (n=22) and obese (n=21). Acoustic measurements were performed with KAY-PENTAX CSL model 4500 and KAY-PENTAX EGG model 6103. During the measurements, the participants were asked to pronounce/ʌ/ phonation. Results: There was no significant difference between any MDVP parameters obtained from 4 BMI groups (p>0.05). Average-jitter, as one of the EGG frequency measurement parameter, has shown a significant difference (p=0.016), which was obtained from post-hoc datests of obese and normal group.According to the median value analysis, the difference was higher in obese individuals0.49 (0.27-1.03), than in normal individuals 0.37 (0.24-0.6). F0 values, obtained from MDVP and EGG, have no significant difference across any BMI group (p>0.05). Conclusion: When the EGG closure phases examined across BMI groups, it was founded that the obese group had higher glottal closing and closing phases compared to other BMI groups, while the glottal opening and opening phases were lower than the other BMI groups. In addition, the fact that the jitter value of the EGG-frequency measurements was higher in the obese group compared to the normal group. That suggests that the risk of dysphonia pathology may be higher in this group.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Voice quality
• Body mass index
• Vocal cords
• Obesity

Kadınlarda Akustik ve Elektroglottografik Parametrelerin Beden Kitle İndeksi Bakımından İncelenmesi

Öz

Amaç: Farklı beden kitle indeksine (BKİ) göre gruplandırılmış kadınların BKİ ile Çok Boyutlu Ses Programı – Multi-Dimensional Voice Program (MDVP) ve Elektroglottograf-Electroglottograph (EGG) ölçüm sonuçlarını incelemektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Çalışma grubunu 18-25 yaş arası 96 kadın katılımcı oluşturmaktadır. Katılımcılar zayıf (n=20), normal (n=29), fazla kilolu (n=22) ve obez (n=21) olarak dört BKİ grubuna ayrılmıştır. Akustik ölçümler KAY-PENTAX CSL model 4500 ve KAYPENTAX EGG model 6103 ile gerçekleştirilmiş olup kayıtlar, /ʌ/ fonasyonu üzerinden alınmıştır. Kayıt sonunda toplanan veriler analiz edilmiş ve gruplar arası karşılaştırmalar yapılmıştır. Bulgular: Dört BKİ grubuna ait MDVP parametreleri arasında anlamlı bir fark tespit edilmemiştir (p>0,05). Ayrıca BKİ’ye göre EGG frekans ölçüm parametrelerinden sadece ortalama jitter anlamlı farklılık gösterirken (p=0,016), bu farkın post-hoc testleri sonucunda obez ve normal grup arasında olduğu belirlenmiştir. Medyan değerler incelendiğinde bu fark, obez bireylerde 0,49 (0,27-1,03), normal bireylere 0,37 (0,24-0,6) göre daha yüksek bulunmuştur. Temel frekans (F0) değerleri ile BKİ grupları arasında ise anlamlı farklılık gözlenmemiştir (p>0,05). Sonuç: Kadın olgularda BKİ gruplarına göre EGG kapanma fazlarına bakıldığında, obez grubun glottal kapanış ve kapanma fazlarının yalnızca ortalama değer olarak, obez olmayan BKİ gruplarına göre daha yüksek olduğu bulunmuştur. Ek olarak glottal açılış ve açıklık fazlarının yalnızca ortalama değer olarak, obez olmayan BKİ gruplarına göre daha düşük olduğu saptanmıştır. Ayrıca EGG-frekans ölçümlerinden jitter değerinin obez grupta normal gruba göre daha yüksek çıkması, bu grupta disfoni patolojisi riskinin daha fazla olabileceğini düşündürmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Beden kitle indeksi
• Obezite
• Ses Telleri
• Ses Özelliği

Kaynakça

1. 1. Brockmann M, Drinnan MJ, Storck C, Carding PN. Reliable jitter and shimmer measurements in voice clinics: The relevance of vowel, gender, vocal intensity, and fundamental frequency effects in a typical clinical task. J Voice. 2011;25(1):44-53.
2. 2. Orlikoff RF, Baken RJ. The effect of the heartbeat on vocal fundamental frequency perturbation. J Speech Hear Res. 1989; 32: 576–582.
3. 3. Schoentgen J. Quantitative evaluation of the discrimination performance of acoustic features in detecting laryngeal pathology. Speech Communication. 19821;1(3-4), 269-282.
4. 4. Klingholz F, Martın F. Quantitative spectral evaluation of shimmer and jitter. J Speech Hear Res. 1985;28:169–174.
5. 5. Hamdan A, Al Barazi R, Khneizer G, Turfe Z, Sınno S, Askhar J, Tabrı D. Formant frequency in relation to body mass composition. J Voice. 2013; 27: 567-571.
6. 6. Solomon NP, Garlitz SJ, Milbrath RL. Respiratory and laryngeal contributions to maximum phonation duration. J Voice. 2000; 14: 31-40.
7. 7. De Souza LBR, Dos Santos MM. Body mass index and acoustic voice parameters: Is there a relationship? Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;84(4):410-415.
8. 8. Fitch TW. Vocal tract length and formant frequency dispersion correlate with body size in rhesus macaques. J Acoust Soc Am. 1997;102:1213-1222.

9. 9. Gonzalez J. Formant frequencies and body size of speaker: A weak relationship in adult humans. Journal of Phonetics. 2004; 32: 277-287.
10. 10. Linders B, Massa GG, Boersma B, Dejonckere PH. Fundamental voice frequency and jitter in girls and boys measured with electroglottography: Influence of age and height. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 1995;33:61-65.
11. 11. Van Dommelen WA, Moxness BH. Acoustic parameters in speaker height and weight identification: Sex-specific behaviour. Language and Speech, 1995; 38: 267–287.
12. 12. Fitch TW, Giedd J. Morphology and development of the human vocal tract: A study using magnetic resonance imaging. J Acoust Soc Am. 1999;106:1511–1522.
13. 13. Hughes SM, Dispenza F, Gallup GG. Ratings of voice attractiveness predict sexual behavior and body configuration. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2004;25:295–304.
14. 14. Evans S, Neave N, Wakelin D. Relationships between vocal characteristics and body size and shape in human males: An evolutionary explanation for a deep male voice. Biol Psychol. 2006;72:160-163.
15. 15. Avelino H. Acoustic and electroglottographic analyses of nonpathological, nonmodal phonation. J Voice. 2010; 24: 270- 280.
16. 16. World Health Organization (2019). BMI Classification 2004 http://apps.who.int/bmi/index.jsp?introPage=intro_3.html adresinden elde edildi. Erişim Tarihi: 27.12.2019
17. 17. Mezanotte WS, Tangel DJ, White DP. Waking genioglossal electromyogram in sleep apnea patients versus normal controls (a neuromuscular’ compensatory mechanism). J Clin Invest. 1992;89:1571–1579.
18. 18. Da Cunha MG, Passerotti GH, Weber R, Zilberstein B, Cecconello I. Voice feature characteristics in morbid obese population. Obes Surg, 2011; 21: 340–344.
19. 19. Baken RJ. Electroglottography. Journal of Voice,1992; 6: 98- 110.
20. 20. Kunzel HJ. How well does average fundamental frequency correlate with speaker height and weight? Phonetica. 1989; 46: 117–125.
21. 21. Blouin K, Boivin A, Tchernof A. Androgens and body fat distribution. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2008; 108: 272–280.
22. 22. D’haeseleer E, Depypere H, Claeys S, Van Lierde KM. The relation between body mass index and speaking fundamental frequency in premenopausal and postmenopausal women. Menopause, 2011; 18: 754-8.
23. 23. Lass NJ, Brown WS. Correlational study of speakers’ heights, weights, body surface areas and speaking fundamental frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am. 1978; 63: 1218–1220.
24. 24. Celebi S, Yelken K, Develioğlu ON, Topak M, Celik O, Ipek HD, Külekçi M. Acoustic perceptual and aerodynamic voice evaluation inan obese population. Journal of Laryngology Otolology. 2013; 127: 1-4.