TY - JOUR
T1 - Consensus for voice quality assessment in clinical practice
T2 - guidelines of the European Laryngological Society and Union of the European Phoniatricians
AU - Lechien, Jerome R.
AU - Geneid, Ahmed
AU - Bohlender, J. rg E.
AU - Cantarella, Giovanna
AU - Avellaneda, Juan C.
AU - Desuter, Gauthier
AU - Sjogren, Elisabeth V.
AU - Finck, Camille
AU - Hans, Stephane
AU - Hess, Markus
AU - Oguz, Haldun
AU - Remacle, Marc J.
AU - Schneider-Stickler, Berit
AU - Tedla, Miroslav
AU - Schindler, Antonio
AU - Vilaseca, Isabel
AU - Zabrodsky, Michal
AU - Dikkers, Frederik G.
AU - Crevier-Buchman, Lise
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2023, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2023/12
Y1 - 2023/12
N2 - Introduction: To update the European guidelines for the assessment of voice quality (VQ) in clinical practice. Methods: Nineteen laryngologists–phoniatricians of the European Laryngological Society (ELS) and the Union of the European Phoniatricians (UEP) participated to a modified Delphi process to propose statements about subjective and objective VQ assessments. Two anonymized voting rounds determined a consensus statement to be acceptable when 80% of experts agreed with a rating of at least 3/4. The statements with ≥ 3/4 score by 60–80% of experts were improved and resubmitted to voting until they were validated or rejected. Results: Of the 90 initial statements, 51 were validated after two voting rounds. A multidimensional set of minimal VQ evaluations was proposed and included: baseline VQ anamnesis (e.g., allergy, medical and surgical history, medication, addiction, singing practice, job, and posture), videolaryngostroboscopy (mucosal wave symmetry, amplitude, morphology, and movements), patient-reported VQ assessment (30- or 10-voice handicap index), perception (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, and Strain), aerodynamics (maximum phonation time), acoustics (Mean F0, Jitter, Shimmer, and noise-to-harmonic ratio), and clinical instruments associated with voice comorbidities (reflux symptom score, reflux sign assessment, eating-assessment tool-10, and dysphagia handicap index). For perception, aerodynamics and acoustics, experts provided guidelines for the methods of measurement. Some additional VQ evaluations are proposed for voice professionals or patients with some laryngeal diseases. Conclusion: The ELS-UEP consensus for VQ assessment provides clinical statements for the baseline and pre- to post-treatment evaluations of VQ and to improve collaborative research by adopting common and validated VQ evaluation approach.
AB - Introduction: To update the European guidelines for the assessment of voice quality (VQ) in clinical practice. Methods: Nineteen laryngologists–phoniatricians of the European Laryngological Society (ELS) and the Union of the European Phoniatricians (UEP) participated to a modified Delphi process to propose statements about subjective and objective VQ assessments. Two anonymized voting rounds determined a consensus statement to be acceptable when 80% of experts agreed with a rating of at least 3/4. The statements with ≥ 3/4 score by 60–80% of experts were improved and resubmitted to voting until they were validated or rejected. Results: Of the 90 initial statements, 51 were validated after two voting rounds. A multidimensional set of minimal VQ evaluations was proposed and included: baseline VQ anamnesis (e.g., allergy, medical and surgical history, medication, addiction, singing practice, job, and posture), videolaryngostroboscopy (mucosal wave symmetry, amplitude, morphology, and movements), patient-reported VQ assessment (30- or 10-voice handicap index), perception (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, and Strain), aerodynamics (maximum phonation time), acoustics (Mean F0, Jitter, Shimmer, and noise-to-harmonic ratio), and clinical instruments associated with voice comorbidities (reflux symptom score, reflux sign assessment, eating-assessment tool-10, and dysphagia handicap index). For perception, aerodynamics and acoustics, experts provided guidelines for the methods of measurement. Some additional VQ evaluations are proposed for voice professionals or patients with some laryngeal diseases. Conclusion: The ELS-UEP consensus for VQ assessment provides clinical statements for the baseline and pre- to post-treatment evaluations of VQ and to improve collaborative research by adopting common and validated VQ evaluation approach.
KW - Assessment
KW - Consensus
KW - Dysphonia
KW - European
KW - Evaluation
KW - Guidelines
KW - Head
KW - Neck
KW - Otolaryngology
KW - Surgery
KW - Voice
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85171254768&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-08211-6
DO - https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-08211-6
M3 - Article
C2 - 37707614
SN - 0937-4477
VL - 280
SP - 5459
EP - 5473
JO - European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS)
JF - European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS)
IS - 12
ER -