Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Voice Training Program for Teachers

Ensaio clínico controlado e randomizado de terapia breve e intensiva com finger kazzo em professoras: estudo preliminar

“…This result is consistent with a study of 102 teachers, divided into two groups, one of which received guidance on vocal health, and vocal exercises including SOVTE, and the other just received guidance on vocal health. Women in the first group showed a reduction of noise on voice and increased f0 and men, reducing of f0 (1) . Prior research with FK pointed out that holding three sets of 15 repetitions of the technique caused a significant decrease in NHR and DSH, showing that there was a reduction of aperiodic energy in the voice signal, even when it comes to women without dysphonia (16) , these results were confirmed in the present study, representing evidence that FK, besides useful in the voice processing, can also be used in cases of dysphonia.…”

“…Vocal problems resulting behaviors of vocal hyperfunction are commonly found in voice professionals, especially in teachers (1) . This is due to the specific demands of the teacher, which can be associated with physical, social, environmental, organizational, psychological and overall health (2,3,4) .…”

“…Scientific evidence about the different types of intervention will work so that they can be used more appropriately and safely by speech and language therapists, with the certainty of generating benefits for patients and, thus, indirectly, to society in general (6,7) . Knowledge about effective techniques provided by randomized clinical trials will contribute to the prevention/treatment of work-related voice disorder (WRVD) as well as to the health promotion of teachers (1,6) . There are currently still gaps in speech science in relation to therapy, especially with regard to the number of repetitions of the vocal techniques, Voice Therapy time required for the rehabilitation of different types of dysphonia or laryngeal conditions and number of weekly therapy sessions (6,7,8) .…”

“…There are currently still gaps in speech science in relation to therapy, especially with regard to the number of repetitions of the vocal techniques, Voice Therapy time required for the rehabilitation of different types of dysphonia or laryngeal conditions and number of weekly therapy sessions (6,7,8) . Investigations with therapy in dysphonic subjects which were used different approaches, including vocals and different technical guidelines, showed positive results, however it is not possible to identify the effective role of each approach within the benefits shown at the end of therapy (1,7,8,9,10,11) . Therefore, for the current scan, it was decided to use only an exercise throughout therapy with standard number of repetitions.…”

“…There were decreased acoustic voice measures of jitter, shimmer, highest fundamental frequency (fhi) and number of voice breaks, besides reduction of breathiness and instability in the study group with no structural laryngeal disorder and instability in the study group with structural laryngeal disorder (19) . Convinced of the benefits of FK, associated with evidence that direct voice therapy is superior to indirect therapy (7,20) , once that the latter is only effective when applied in conjunction with the first (1,21) , the hypothesis is that FK performed intensively manages benefits over power measurements glottal of dysphonic teachers. Furthermore, the benefits of intensive processing of voice include: voice recovery in a short period of time, increased adherence of the subject, increased use of session time, decreasing the time between sessions and increased ability to transfer strategies learned to everyday life (10,21,22,23) .…”