• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.17-21
• /
• 2005

Purpose : To evaluate the voices of irradiated patients with early glottic carcinoma and to compare these with the voices of healthy volunteers. Materials and Methods : The voice samples (sustained vowel) of seventeen male patients who had been irradiated for T1a glottic squamous carcinoma at least 1 year prior to the study were analyzed with objective voice analyzer (acoustic voice analysis, aerodynamic test, and videostroboscopic analysis) and compared with those of a normal group of twenty age- and sex-matched volunteers. Average fundamental frequency, jitter, shimmer, and noise-to-harmonic ratio were obtained for acoustic voice analysis. Maximal phonation time, mean flow rate, intensity, subglottic pressure, glottal resistance, glottal efficiency, and glottal power were obtained for aerodynamic test. Results : The irradiated group presented higher values of shimmer in acoustic voice analysis. There was no significant difference between two groups in other parameters. Conclusion : In this study all the objective voice parameters except shimmer were no4 significantly different between the irradiated group and the control group. These results suggest that the voice quality is minimally affected by radiation therapy for 71 a glottic carcinoma.

• Phonetics and Speech Sciences
• /
• v.15 no.4
• /
• pp.61-69
• /
• 2023

Sulcus vocalis is characterized by incomplete closure of the vocal folds, with a high mean airflow rate (MFR) as a distinctive feature. The MFR is measured using two aerodynamic analysis methods [the maximum sustained phonation protocol (MXPH) and voicing efficiency protocol (VOEF)] of the phonatory aerodynamic system (PAS), and the results may vary depending on the method. This study compared the differences in MFR before and after treatment (microsurgery and voice therapy) according to the MXPH and VOEF of the PAS in 30 patients with sulcus vocalis. Additionally, we examined whether there were differences in the subjective voice evaluation (voice handicap index, VHI), perceptual voice evaluation (GRBS), and fundamental frequency (F0) before and after treatment. The results showed significant differences between the two methods, both before and after treatment, in patients with sulcus vocalis. However, there were no significant differences by methods in the changes before and after treatment. The VHI and GRBS scores significantly decreased after treatment; however, F0 showed no significant differences before and after treatment. This study indicates that when evaluating MFR changes in patients with sulcus vocalis, it is acceptable to use either aerodynamic analysis (MXPH or VOEF).