대한후두음성언어의학회지 (Journal of the Korean Society of Laryngology, Phoniatrics and Logopedics)

  • 제30권2호
  • /
  • Pages.118-123
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 2508-268X(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2508-5603(eISSN)
대한후두음성언어의학회 (The Korean Society of Laryngology, Phoniatrics and Logopedics. )
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

발성장애 환자에서 주관적 음성검사와 객관적 음성검사의 연관성 연구

Study for Correlation between Objective and Subjective Voice Parameters in Patients with Dysphonia

  • 박정우 (가천대학교 의과대학 길병원 이비인후과학교실) ;
  • 김보람 (가천대학교 의과대학 길병원 이비인후과학교실) ;
  • 오재환 (가천대학교 의과대학 길병원 이비인후과학교실) ;
  • 강태규 (가천대학교 의과대학 길병원 이비인후과학교실) ;
  • 김동영 (가천대학교 의과대학 길병원 이비인후과학교실) ;
  • 우주현 (가천대학교 의과대학 길병원 이비인후과학교실)
  • Park, Jung Woo (Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gachon University College of Medicine, Gil Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Boram (Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gachon University College of Medicine, Gil Medical Center) ;
  • Oh, Jae Hwan (Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gachon University College of Medicine, Gil Medical Center) ;
  • Kang, Tae Kyu (Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gachon University College of Medicine, Gil Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Dong Young (Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gachon University College of Medicine, Gil Medical Center) ;
  • Woo, Joo Hyun (Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gachon University College of Medicine, Gil Medical Center)
  • 투고 : 2019.11.25
  • 심사 : 2019.12.06
  • 발행 : 2019.12.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Background and Objectives Voice evaluation is classified into subjective tests such as auditory perception and self-measurement, and objective tests such as acoustic and aerodynamic analysis. When evaluating dysphonia, subjective and objective test results do not always match. The purpose of this study was to analyze the relationship between subjective and objective evaluation in patients with dysphonia and to identify meaningful parameters by disease. Materials and Method The total of 322 patients who visited voice clinic from May 2017 to May 2018 were included in this study. Laryngeal lesions were identified using stroboscopy. Pearson correlation test was performed to analyse correlation between subjective tests including GRBAS scale and voice handicap index, and objective tests including jitter, shimmer, noise to harmonic ratio (NHR), cepstral peak prominence (CPP), maximal phonation time (MPT), mean flow rate, and subglottic pressure. Results In vocal nodule and sulcus vocalis, among GRBAS system, grade and breathiness showed good correlation with CPP, and roughness showed good correlation with jitter or shimmer. In unilateral vocal cord paralysis (UVCP), grade and breathiness showed a very good correlation with CPP, and also good correlation with jitter, shimmer, NHR, and MPT. Also asthenia showed good correlation with CPP and MPT. Vocal polyp has a limited association with other diseases. Conclusion In patients with dysphonia, grade and breathiness showed good correlation with CPP, jitter, and shimmer, and reflect the state of voice change well especially in UVCP, CPP, and MPT.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Dejonckere PH, Bradley P, Clemente P, Cornut G, Crevier-Buchman L, Friedrich G, et al. A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques. Guideline elaborated by the Committee on Phoniatrics of the European Laryngological Society (ELS). Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2001;258(2):77-82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004050000299
  2. Maryn Y, Roy N, De Bodt M, Van Cauwenberge P, Corthals P. Acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: a meta-analysis. J Acoust Soc Am 2009;126(5):2619-34. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3224706
  3. V Latoszek BB, Maryn Y, Gerrits E, De Bodt M. A meta-analysis: acoustic measurement of roughness and breathiness. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2018;61(2):298-323. https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_JSLHR-S-16-0188
  4. Woisard V, Bodin S, Yardeni E, Puech M. The voice handicap index: correlation between subjective patient response and quantitative assessment of voice. J Voice 2007;21(5):623-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2006.04.005
  5. Hillenbrand J, Cleveland RA, Erickson RL. Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality. J Speech Hear Res 1994;37(4):769-78. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3704.769
  6. Kim JO, Lim SE, Park SY, Choi SH, Choi JN, Choi HS. Validity and reliability of korean-version of voice handicap index and voice-related quality of life. Speech Sciences 2007;14(3):111-25.
  7. Schindler A, Mozzanica F, Vedrody M, Maruzzi P, Ottaviani F. Correlation between the Voice Handicap Index and voice measurements in four groups of patients with dysphonia. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009;141(6):762-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2009.08.021
  8. Munoz J, Mendoza E, Fresneda MD, Carballo G, Lopez P. Acoustic and perceptual indicators of normal and pathological voice. Folia Phoniatr Logop 2003;55(2):102-14. https://doi.org/10.1159/000070092
  9. Bhuta T, Patrick L, Garnett JD. Perceptual evaluation of voice quality and its correlation with acoustic measurements. J Voice 2004;18(3):299-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2003.12.004
  10. de Krom G. Some spectral correlates of pathological breathy and rough voice quality for different types of vowel fragments. J Speech Hear Res 1995;38(4):794-811. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3804.794
  11. Heman-Ackah YD, Heuer RJ, Michael DD, Ostrowski R, Horman M, Baroody MM, et al. Cepstral peak prominence: a more reliable measure of dysphonia. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2003;112(4):324-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/000348940311200406
  12. Klatt DH, Klatt LC. Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. J Acoust Soc Am 1990;87(2):820-57. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.398894
  13. Awan SN, Roy N. Toward the development of an objective index of dysphonia severity: a four-factor acoustic model. Clin Linguist Phon 2006;20(1):35-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699200400008353
  14. Awan SN, Roy N. Outcomes measurement in voice disorders: application of an acoustic index of dysphonia severity. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2009;52(2):482-99. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2008/08-0034)
  15. Kim TH, Choi JI, Lee SH, Jin SM. Comparison of vowel and text-based cepstral analysis in dysphonia evaluation. J Korean Soc Laryngol Phoniatr Logop 2015; 26(2):117-21. https://doi.org/10.22469/jkslp.2015.26.2.117
  16. Park MC, Mun MK, Lee SH, Jin SM. Clinical usefulness of cepstral analysis in dysphonia evaluation. Korean J Otorhinolaryngol-Head Neck Surg 2013:56;574-8. https://doi.org/10.3342/kjorl-hns.2013.56.9.574
  17. Dejonckere PH, Lebacq J. Acoustic, perceptual, aerodynamic and anatomical correlations in voice pathology. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 1996;58(6):326-32. https://doi.org/10.1159/000276864
  18. Dejonckere PH, Remacle M, Fresnel-Elbaz E, Woisard V, Crevier-Buchman L, Millet B. Differentiated perceptual evaluation of pathological voice quality: reliability and correlations with acoustic measurements. Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord) 1996;117(3):219-24.
  19. Eadie T, Sroka A, Wright DR, Merati A. Does knowledge of medical diagnosis bias auditory-perceptual judgments of dysphonia? J Voice 2011;25(4):420-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2009.12.009
  20. Awan SN, Roy N, Cohen SM. Exploring the relationship between spectral and cepstral measures of voice and the Voice Handicap Index (VHI). J Voice 2014;28(4):430-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2013.12.008