Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a multisystemic disorder characterized by functional and structural abnormalities of small blood vessels and fibrosis of the skin and internal organs. Eighty percent of subjects with SSc have orofacial manifestations. No tests for oral manifestations have been validated for this pathology, and in the literature there are few studies of speech therapy for subjects with SSc. These facts suggested the need for an exhaustive assessment of mouth mobility and muscle strength, and also of swallowing and voice, in order to plan a targeted and effective speech therapy. The Scleroderma Logopedic Scale (SLS) has been developed to assess disorders in five domains: Impairment, Swallow, Voice, Multifield, and Quality of Life. Perception of these disorders was assessed in 84 subjects with SSc and in 40 healthy subjects. After the first draft, a shorter form (39 items) was obtained after statistical analysis. This scale showed good discriminant and concurrent validity. Internal consistency was good: three of five subscales had a Cronbach alpha coefficient higher than 0.8. The test/retest coefficient for the total score was 0.94. Thirty-six percent of examined subjects showed moderate to severe oropharyngolaryngeal disorders. Swallowing disorders and impairment of mouth (e.g., decrease in mobility and strength) were the most commonly reported problems. Conversely, the change of voice due to the pathology was not perceived as a problem. Fifty-five percent of subjects reported a decreased level of quality of life.

No abstract

Attempts to mitigate conflict between wolves and livestock breeding in the Mugello area of central Italy have so far proven to be costly, resource-intensive and fraught with tension. I applied frame analysis as a tool for investigating the roots of such tensions. The frameanalytical perspective highlighted that, while current policy focuses on improving technical approaches, conflict is also fuelled by a discrepancy in the frames of meaning that groups of stakeholders construct around the issue of wolf management. I outline two discordant frames: a dominant valuable wolf frame, currently underlying policy, and a political wolf frame that challenges existing management aims. Barriers to communication and potential points of mediation are identified. In addition, I outline a third, problematic wolf frame that may act as a potential aid in the process of bridging the two discordant frames, which is identified as a condition for successful wolf management.

The aim of the present study was to provide quantitative data of oral function in healthy subjects (HSs), validity of measurements and estimation of measurement bias, as well as quantify oral impairment in persons with scleroderma (SSc). 151 HSs and 12 subjects with SSc were recruited and assessed using instrumented tools, measuring maximal mouth opening; lip strength; and tongue strength, protrusion, retraction, and endurance. Twenty HSs were also retested 3-5 weeks later in order to assess the test-retest reliability of the measurements. Intraclass correlation coefficients proved to be satisfactory (>0.8) for both inter-rater and test-retest reliabilities of all measurements except for tongue retraction. In the HS group, maximal mouth opening and tongue and lips strength values were larger (P < 0.05) for males than females, while no significant differences were found for other variables. Older subjects had statistically significantly lower tongue retraction values and tongue endurance values than younger subjects. The SSc group showed a statistically significant decrease (P < 0.05) in almost all the measurements. Assessment procedures proved to be valid and reliable. Gender and height were predictors of mouth opening, lip and tongue strength, while age correlates with tongue retraction and endurance. Measurements highlighted the strong impact of SSc on oral functions and in particular on tongue protrusion, tongue strength, and endurance.

Background: Hypophonia is a prevailing problem in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). However, evidence supporting the effectiveness of voice rehabilitation is lacking. Objective: The aim of this study was to identify the most effective method to reduce hypophonia. Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 44 PwMS were randomized to intensive and high-effort voice treatment groups, the LSVT-LOUD®, and conventional treatment group. Subjects received 16 treatments (4 sessions/week) lasting 45 minutes. The primary outcome was voice intensity (dB) in monologue, vocalization, and sentences while voice handicap index (VHI) measured voice self-perception. Outcomes were assessed by a blinded observer at baseline, post-treatment, and 15-month follow-up (FU). Results: Linear models revealed a significant post-intervention between-group mean difference in favor of LSVT-LOUD for monologue: +6.3 dB (95% CI: 2.5 to 10.1); vocalization: +7.4 dB (95% CI: 2.3 to 12.5); and sentences: +9.5 dB (95% CI: 4.7 to 14.3). However, 43.7% PwMS in the LSVT-LOUD and 10% in the conventional treatment group obtained a full recovery of voice intensity (>60 dB) post-treatment, Fisher’s test = 13.3, p < 0.01. However, these improvements were not maintained at FU. Between-group differences at VHI were −10.8 (95% CI: −21.2 to −0.4) and −11.3 (95% CI: −24.3 to −1.7) in favor of LSVT-LOUD at post and FU. Conclusion: LSVT-LOUD can be a valid treatment to increase voice intensity in PwMS. However, results suggest the need for FU interventions targeting maintenance.