No abstract

Summary: Objectives. Teachers are at increased risk for developing voice disorders. Occupational risk factors have been extensively examined; however, little attention has been paid to the consequences of the vocal complaints. The objective of this study was to investigate the knowledge that teachers have about vocal care, treatment-seeking behavior, and voice-related absenteeism. Methods. The study group comprised 994 teachers and 290 controls whose jobs did not involve vocal effort. All participants completed a questionnaire inquiring about vocal complaints, treatment-seeking behavior, voice-related absenteeism, and knowledge about vocal care. Comparisons were made between teachers with and without vocal complaints and with the control group. Results. Teachers reported significantly more voice problems than the control population (51.2% vs 27.4%) (c 2 ¼ 50.45, df ¼ 1, P < 0.001). Female teachers reported significantly higher levels of voice disorders than their male colleagues (38% vs 13.2%, c 2 ¼ 22.34, df ¼ 1, P < 0.001). Teachers (25.4%) sought medical care and eventually 20.6% had missed at least 1 day of work because of voice problems. Female teachers were significantly more likely to seek medical help (c 2 ¼ 7.24, df ¼ 1, P ¼ 0.007) and to stay at home (c 2 ¼ 7.10, df ¼ 1, P ¼ 0.008) in comparison with their male colleagues. Only 13.5% of all teachers received information during their education. Conclusions. Voice disorders have an impact on teachers' personal and professional life and imply a major financial burden for society. A substantial number of teachers needed medical help and was obligated to stay at home because of voice problems. This study strongly recommends the implementation of vocal education during the training of teacher students to prepare the vocal professional user.

Functional voice disorders were overall the most common cause of voice disorders (except in childhood), followed by vocal fold nodules and pharyngolaryngeal reflux. Professional voice users accounted for almost one half of the active population, with functional voice disorders as the main cause of dysphonia.

The vocal quality of a patient is modeled by means of a Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI), which is designed to establish an objective and quantitative correlate of the perceived vocal quality. The DSI is based on the weighted combination of the following selected set of voice measurements: highest frequency (F(0)-High in Hz), lowest intensity (I-Low in dB), maximum phonation time (MPT in s), and jitter (%). The DSI is derived from a multivariate analysis of 387 subjects with the goal of describing, purely based on objective measures, the perceived voice quality. It is constructed as DSI = 0.13 x MPT + 0.0053 x F(0)-High - 0.26 x I-Low - 1.18 x Jitter (%) + 12.4. The DSI for perceptually normal voices equals +5 and for severely dysphonic voices -5. The more negative the patient's index, the worse is his or her vocal quality. As such, the DSI is especially useful to evaluate therapeutic evolution of dysphonic patients. Additionally, there is a high correlation between the DSI and the Voice Handicap Index score.

No abstract