The Clinical Features of Functional Dysphonia

Sama, Anshul; Carding, Paul; Price, Sean; Kelly, Peter; Wilson, Janet A.

doi:10.1097/00005537-200103000-00015

Cited by 112 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Voice disorders characterized by vocal complaints in the absence of laryngeal structural pathology may precede laryngeal structural pathology (Morrison & Rammage, 1993). In addition, this group represents an estimated 40% or more of the voice-disordered clinical caseload (Sama, Carding, Price, Kelly, & Wilson, 2001). Many different terms are used to describe these voice disorders, including muscle misuse voice disorders, muscle tension dysphonia, functional voice disorders, and hyperfunctional voice disorders.…”

Section: Terminology Confusion In Defining Voice Disordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nasoendoscopy has been used to make subjective ratings of laryngeal closure characteristics during connected speaking; however, this technique has been limited by the reduced illumination of the endoscope resulting in compromised image clarity. Researchers have shown that it is difficult to obtain reliable subjective ratings, and that signs of laryngeal constriction may not differentiate subjects with and without voice disorders (Sama et al, 2001). …”

Section: Tools To Assess Vocal Fold Adductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Respiratory and Laryngeal Function During Spontaneous Speaking in Teachers With Voice Disorders

Lowell

Barkmeier-Kraemer

Hoit

et al. 2008

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To determine if respiratory and laryngeal function during spontaneous speaking were different for teachers with voice disorders compared with teachers without voice problems. Method Eighteen teachers, 9 with and 9 without voice disorders, were included in this study. Respiratory function was measured with magnetometry, and laryngeal function was measured with electroglottography during 3 spontaneous speaking tasks: a simulated teaching task at a typical loudness level, a simulated teaching task at an increased loudness level, and a conversational speaking task. Electroglottography measures were also obtained for 3 structured speaking tasks: a paragraph reading task, a sustained vowel, and a maximum phonation time vowel. Results Teachers with voice disorders started and ended their breath groups at significantly smaller lung volumes than teachers without voice problems during teaching-related speaking tasks; however, there were no between-group differences in laryngeal measures. Task-related differences were found on several respiratory measures and on one laryngeal measure. Conclusions These findings suggest that teachers with voice disorders used different speech breathing strategies than teachers without voice problems. Implications for clinical management of teachers with voice disorders are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Terminology Confusion In Defining Voice Disordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Tools To Assess Vocal Fold Adductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Respiratory and Laryngeal Function During Spontaneous Speaking in Teachers With Voice Disorders

Lowell

Barkmeier-Kraemer

Hoit

et al. 2008

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results obtained indicated that the presence of lesion in the vocal cords was more common among the subjects who considered their voice to be normal, while hypomobility of the vocal folds was more common in the subjects who reported voice problems [13]. Regarding functional dysphonia, Sama et al [14] say that the laryngoscopic characteristics commonly associated with this type of dysphonia are common in the normal population and cannot distinguish dysphonic patients from normal subjects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Effectiveness of Laryngostroboscopy for Monitoring the Evolution of Functional Dysphonia after Rehabilitator Treatment

Halawa¹,

Muñoz²,

Pérez

2013

Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the laryngostroboscopy for monitoring the evolution of patients with functional dysphonia before and after the logopedic vocal treatment. We performed a prospective observational study of 65 dysphonic patients diagnosed of functional dysphonia, where we analyzed four stroboscopic parameters (glottal closure, vocal fold vibration, mucosal wave and phase symmetry) by a protocol based on systematic subjective evaluation of the stroboscopic images before and after the rehabilitator treatment; and the results were stratified according to the clinical course. All patients, before the treatment, had some abnormality in at least one of the four analyzed aspects. After the vocal treatment, we found improvement of the four parameters in different degrees, and we just found a statistically significant relationship between the evolution of the glottal closure and the clinical course. We believe that the laryngostroboscopy, systematized through a protocol, is a useful technique for the diagnosis of functional abnormalities in patients with functional dysphonia but it is not a very useful technique for evaluating the results after the rehabilitator treatment, as there is not a statistically significant relationship between clinical course and the change in the most stroboscopic parameters, so it shouldn't be the only technique used for these proposes.

show abstract

“…However, these techniques are subjective and prone to difficulties with reliability. For example, supraglottal compression is often attributed to individuals with VH; however, it is also present in individuals with healthy voices (Behrman, Dahl, Abramson, & Schutte, 2003;Pemberton et al, 1993;Sama, Carding, Price, Kelly, & Wilson, 2001;Stager et al, 2001;Stager, Bielamowicz, Regnell, Gupta, & Barkmeier, 2000;Stager, Neubert, Miller, Regnell, & Bielamowicz, 2003). Furthermore, even expert clinicians show weak interrater agreement for visual estimates of tension (Milstein, 1999;Stepp, Heaton, Jetté, Burns, & Hillman, 2010).…”

Section: T He Clinical Diagnosis Of Vocal Hyperfunction (Vh)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Relative Fundamental Frequency Distinguishes Between Phonotraumatic and Non-Phonotraumatic Vocal Hyperfunction

Murray

Lien

Stan

et al. 2017

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The purpose of this article is to examine the ability of an acoustic measure, relative fundamental frequency (RFF), to distinguish between two subtypes of vocal hyperfunction (VH): phonotraumatic (PVH) and non-phonotraumatic (NPVH). Method: RFF values were compared among control individuals with typical voices (N = 49), individuals with PVH (N = 54), and individuals with NPVH (N = 35). Results: Offset Cycle 10 RFF differed significantly among all 3 groups with values progressively decreasing for controls, individuals with NPVH, and individuals with PVH. Individuals with PVH also had lower Offset Cycles 8 and 9 relative to the other 2 groups and lower RFF values for Offset Cycle 7 relative to controls. There was also a trend for lower Onset Cycle 1 RFF values for the PVH group compared with the NPVH group. Conclusions: RFF values were significantly different between controls and individuals with VH and also between the two subtypes of VH. This study adds further support to the notion that the differences between these two subsets of VH may be functional as well as structural.

show abstract

The Clinical Features of Functional Dysphonia

Abstract: The laryngoscopy features commonly associated with FD are frequently prevalent in the nondysphonic population and fail to distinguish patients with FD from normal subjects.

Cited by 112 publications

References 13 publications

Respiratory and Laryngeal Function During Spontaneous Speaking in Teachers With Voice Disorders

Respiratory and Laryngeal Function During Spontaneous Speaking in Teachers With Voice Disorders

Effectiveness of Laryngostroboscopy for Monitoring the Evolution of Functional Dysphonia after Rehabilitator Treatment

Relative Fundamental Frequency Distinguishes Between Phonotraumatic and Non-Phonotraumatic Vocal Hyperfunction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About