Aim The global health pandemic caused by the SARS-coronavirus 2 (COVID-19) has led to the adoption of facemasks as a necessary safety precaution. Depending on the level of risk for exposure to the virus, the facemasks that are used can vary. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of different types of facemasks, typically used by healthcare professionals and the public during the COVID-19 pandemic, on measures of voice. Methods Nineteen adults (ten females, nine males) with a normal voice quality completed sustained vowel tasks. All tasks were performed for each of the six mask conditions: no mask, cloth mask, surgical mask, KN95 mask and, surgical mask over a KN95 mask with and without a face shield. Intensity measurements were obtained at a 1ft and 6ft distance from the speaker with sound level meters. Tasks were recorded with a 1ft mouth-to-microphone distance. Acoustic variables of interest were fundamental frequency (F0), and formant frequencies (F1, F2) for /a/ and /i/ and smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPs) for /a/. Results Data were analyzed to compare differences between sex and mask types. There was statistical significance between males and females for intensity measures and all acoustic variables except F2 for /a/ and F1 for /i/. Few pairwise comparisons between masks reached significance even though main effects for mask type were observed. These are further discussed in the article. Conclusion The masks tested in this study did not have a significant impact on intensity, fundamental frequency, CPPs, first or second formant frequency compared to voice output without a mask. Use of a face shield seemed to affect intensity and CPPs to some extent. Implications of these findings are discussed further in the article.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose In speech-language pathology, training in the treatment and evaluation of voice and voice disorders exists at the university level, fellowship level, and in early career opportunities. These opportunities, specifically in voice, are limited, resulting in a highly competitive process for those pursuing a career in voice pathology. This study aims to identify characteristics and trends of clinicians who have started a voice-focused career. Method A 34-question online survey was distributed to early career clinicians, defined as less than 5 years of practice with Certification of Clinical Competence, and clinical fellows with voice patients comprising at least 75% of their caseload. The survey was structured on seven topics: demographics and current clinical practice, application and interview process for clinical fellowship (CF), graduate clinical experience in voice, voice performance background and education, research experience, supplementary education and training, and networking. Results Fifty-six individuals responded to the survey. Over 80% of study participants reported experiences as a voice or singing voice performer, commitments to supplementary training and education, and a graduate clinical placement in voice, all prior to their CF. Fifty-two of the 56 respondents (92.9%) believe there are currently not enough voice-specific CF training opportunities. Conclusions Background in performance voice, obtaining a graduate-level voice placement, and early demonstration of commitment through networking and extracurricular activities are common findings in those successful starting careers in voice pathology. Acquisition of a CF position with specialization in voice and voice disorders is challenging due to the limited number of positions.