The effectiveness of a voice treatment approach for teachers with self-reported voice problems. Evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of voice therapy using transnasal flexible laryngoscopy: a randomized controlled trial. The effectiveness of group therapy for students with mild voice disorders: a controlled clinical trial. Is voice therapy an effective treatment for dysphonia? A randomised controlled trial. A study of the effectiveness of voice therapy in the treatment of 45 patients with nonorganic dysphonia.
Teachers are considered the professional group most at risk of developing voice-problems, but limited treatment effectiveness evidence exists. We studied prospectively the effectiveness of a 6-week combined treatment approach using vocal function exercises (VFEs) and vocal hygiene (VH) education with 20 teachers with self-reported voice problems. Twenty subjects were randomly assigned to a no-treatment control (n = 11) and a treatment group (n = 9). Fibreoptic endoscopic evaluation was carried out on all subjects before randomization. Two self-report voice outcome measures were used: the Voice-Related Quality of Life (VRQOL) and the Voice Symptom Severity Scale (VoiSS). A Voice Care Knowledge Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), developed specifically for the study, was also used to evaluate change in selected voice knowledge areas. A Student unpaired t test revealed a statistically significant (P < 0.05) improvement in the treatment group as measured by the VoiSS. There was not a significant improvement in the treatment group as measured by the V-RQOL. The difference in voice care knowledge areas was also significant for the treatment group (P < 0.05). This study suggests that a voice treatment approach of VFEs and VH education improved self-reported voice symptoms and voice care knowledge in a group of teachers. Transnasal flexible laryngoscopy (TFL) is an examination of laryngeal anatomy and physiology using continuous light. TFL is being used increasingly by voice pathologists in treatment but with little scientific evidence to support it. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of TFL as a therapeutic tool. The study used a prospective randomized controlled trial. Fifty dysphonic subjects were recruited and randomly assigned to either a traditional treatment group or a TFL-assisted treatment group. The effectiveness of voice therapy in both treatment groups was measured with a package of voice outcome measures. Subjects in both treatment groups demonstrated statistically significant improvements after voice therapy (perceptual auditory rating of voice quality measurement p < 0.01; instrumental electroglottographic measurement p < 0.01; patient questionnaire measurement p < 0.01). The time taken to complete treatment in both groups was recorded. The average (median) time taken to complete voice therapy in the TFL-assisted treatment group was 2 hours less than in the traditional treatment group (p < 0.01). Voice therapy with TFL as a therapy tool was effective and more efficient than traditional voice therapy. Previous studies of students studying to be teachers have indicated that these students commonly have voice disorders. Ideally, voice disorders should be treated before students start their work as teachers, but the resources for this treatment are often limited. This study examines whether group voice therapy is effective for teacher students. Accordingly, 20 teacher students with mild voice disorders received group voice therapy (in three small groups), whereas 20 students with similar voice disorders served as a control group and consequently did not receive voice therapy. Two out of three outcome measures (perceptual evaluation of voice quality and a questionnaire on the occurrence of vocal symptoms) indicated significant changes in the treatment group compared with the control group. No differences between groups were noted in the laryngeal status. The results suggest that group voice therapy seems to be an effective method to treat students with mild voice disorders. To assess the overall efficacy of voice therapy for dysphonia.
                Single blind randomised controlled trial.
                Outpatient clinic in a teaching hospital. Participants: 204 outpatients aged 17-87 with a primary symptom of persistent hoarseness for at least two months.
                After baseline assessments, patients were randomised to six weeks of either voice therapy or no treatment. Assessments were repeated at six weeks on the 145 (71%) patients who continued to this stage and at 12-14 weeks on the 133 (65%) patients who completed the study. The assessments at the three time points for the 70 patients who completed treatment and the 63 patients in the group given no treatment were compared.
                Ratings of laryngeal features, Buffalo voice profile, amplitude and pitch perturbation, voice profile questionnaire, hospital anxiety and depression scale, clinical interview schedule, SF-36.
                Voice therapy improved voice quality as assessed by rating by patients (P=0.001) and rating by observer (P<0.001). The treatment effects for these two outcomes were 4.1 (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 6.6) points and 0.82 (0.50 to 1.13) points. Amplitude perturbation showed improvement at six weeks (P=0.005) but not on completion of the study. Patients with dysphonia had appreciable psychological distress and lower quality of life than controls, but voice therapy had no significant impact on either of these variables.
                Voice therapy is effective in improving voice quality as assessed by self rated and observer rated methods. Forty-five patients diagnosed as having nonorganic dysphonia were assigned in rotation to 1 of 3 groups. Patients in group 1 received no treatment and acted as a control group. Patients in groups 2 and 3 received a program of indirect therapy and direct with indirect therapy, respectively. A range of qualitative and quantitative measures were carried out on all patients before and after treatment to evaluate change in voice quality over time. Results revealed a significant difference between the 3 treatment groups in the amount of change for the voice severity, electrolaryngograph, and shimmer measurements and on ratings provided by a patient questionnaire (P<0.05). However, other measures failed to show significant differences between the 3 groups. Most of the patients (86%) in group 1 showed no significant change on any of the measures. Some patients in treatment group 2 (46%) showed significant change in voice quality. Fourteen out of 15 patients (93%) in treatment group showed significant changes in voice quality.