Prevalence of Objective Voice Measurement Use in Laryngology Practices in the United States

Christopher Yam; Joe Christianson; Robert T Sataloff

doi:10.1016/j.jvoice.2023.10.035

Prevalence of Objective Voice Measurement Use in Laryngology Practices in the United States

J Voice. 2023 Nov 16:S0892-1997(23)00356-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2023.10.035. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Christopher Yam¹, Joe Christianson¹, Robert T Sataloff²

Affiliations

¹ Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
² Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: rtsataloff@phillyent.com.

PMID: 37980207
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2023.10.035

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of use of objective voice measurements (OVM), instrumentation, and factors that may impact OVM outcomes, such as setting and implementation to clarify current practice. Doing so should clarify the impact of OVM research on patient care.

Methods: A 12-question, one-time anonymous survey using the Research Electronic Data Capture tool was distributed during January 2023 to laryngologists in the United States identified through membership in The Voice Foundation (TVF) or previous participation in a TVF symposium.

Results: A total of 101 responses to 418 emails yielded a response rate of 24.2%. Seventeen point eight percentage (N = 18) were in private practice, 63.4% (N = 64) were in academic settings, and 18.8% (N = 19) were classified as mixed private and academic. Common OVMs used were fundamental frequency 95.12% (N = 78), maximum phonation time 90.24% (N = 74), noise-to-harmonic ratio 71.95% (N = 59), jitter 71.95% (N = 59), and shimmer 70.73% (N = 58). Common equipment and software used Pentax Multi-Dimensional Voice Program 42.68% (N = 35), Pentax Computerized Speech Lab Model 4500B 37.80% (N = 31), and Pentax Visi-Pitch, Model 3950C 23.17% (N = 19), PRAAT 21.95% (N = 18), OperaVOX 4.88% (N = 4), VoceVista 3.66% (N = 3). Fifty one point two percentage (N = 42) stated that they used OVMs with the majority of their patients, most commonly for the assessment of treatment effectiveness (84.1%, N = 69), documentation (78.0%, N = 64), research (70.7%, N = 58), and/or diagnosis (61.0%, N = 50). Ninety point two percentage (N = 74) stated that OVMs were used during initial evaluation of patients.

Conclusion: This study estimates of the prevalence of OVM use among laryngologists in the United States. There appears to be sufficient consistency among laryngology centers to permit comparison of results between centers, although additional research is needed. Future OVM research should compare measurements and equipment commonly used by laryngologists to define further the generalizability of results.

Keywords: Laryngology; Objective voice measurement; Survey study.