Improving Voice Production for Adults With Age-related Dysphonia
Overview
- Phase
- N/A
- Intervention
- Not specified
- Conditions
- Presbylarynx
- Sponsor
- University of Arizona
- Enrollment
- 220
- Locations
- 2
- Primary Endpoint
- Acoustic measure of voice quality (Cepstral Peak Prominence)
- Status
- Active, Not Recruiting
- Last Updated
- 6 months ago
Overview
Brief Summary
The objectives for this research are to determine the mechanisms by which specific therapy tasks improve voice in age-related dysphonia, and the conditions that limit the extent of improvement. The central hypothesis is that targeted therapy tasks will improve voice, and that severity will determine the extent of improvement.
Investigators
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- •Adults in age range who volunteer
- •Can understand and complete directions presented in English
- •People with voice disorder associated with advancing age will be included, including bowing, incomplete closure, mild edema, erythema, signs of laryngopharyngeal reflux.
Exclusion Criteria
- •Laryngeal differences not related to aging (e.g., vocal fold paralysis, moderate-severe edema, lesions, leukoplakia, dysplasia, Parkinson disease)
- •Known history of stroke, brain injury, or other neurological disorder
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Acoustic measure of voice quality (Cepstral Peak Prominence)
Time Frame: End of year 3
Perceived voice quality
Time Frame: End of year 3
Participants will score the construct of "overall voice quality" using a technique called "sort and rate" in which listeners move icons representing each sound along a line. They align the icons so that best voices are on one side and worst voices are on the other. The distance between the icons represents how much better or worse one sound is than the other. There are no units to the scale. Rankings from all listeners are combined using the statistical technique of multidimensional scaling. The result is a ranked value for each sound file (i.e., voice production) that shows how different they are. There is no highest or lowest value.
Relative glottal gap from laryngeal high-speed videoendoscopy
Time Frame: End of year 3
Secondary Outcomes
- Speed index from laryngeal high-speed videoendoscopy(End of year 3)
- Open quotient from laryngeal high-speed videoendoscopy(End of year 3)
- Fundamental frequency standard deviation from laryngeal high-speed videoendoscopy(End of year 3)
- Maximum area declination ratefrom laryngeal high-speed videoendoscopy(End of year 3)