We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
A Preliminary Quantitative Comparison of Vibratory Amplitude Using Rigid and Flexible Stroboscopic Assessment.
Journal of Voice 2016 July
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to establish preliminary, quantitative data on amplitude of vibration during stroboscopic assessment in healthy speakers with normal voice characteristics. Amplitude of vocal fold vibration is a core physiological parameter used in diagnosing voice disorders, yet quantitative data are lacking to guide the determination of what constitutes normal vibratory amplitude.
METHODS/STUDY DESIGN: Eleven participants were assessed during sustained vowel production using rigid and flexible endoscopy with stroboscopy. Still images were extracted from digital recordings of a sustained /i/ produced at a comfortable pitch and loudness, with F0 controlled so that levels were within ±15% of each participant's comfortable mean level as determined from connected speech. Glottal width (GW), true vocal fold (TVF) length, and TVF width were measured from still frames representing the maximum open phase of the vibratory cycle. To control for anatomic and magnification differences across participants, GW was normalized to TVF length. GW as a ratio of TVF width was also computed for comparison with prior studies.
RESULTS: Mean values and standard deviations were computed for the normalized measures. Paired t tests showed no significant differences between rigid and flexible endoscopy methods. Interrater and intrarater reliability values for raw measurements were found to be high (0.89-0.99).
CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary quantitative data may be helpful in determining normality or abnormality of vocal fold vibration. Results indicate that quantified amplitude of vibration is similar between endoscopic methods, a clinically relevant finding for individuals performing and interpreting stroboscopic assessments.
METHODS/STUDY DESIGN: Eleven participants were assessed during sustained vowel production using rigid and flexible endoscopy with stroboscopy. Still images were extracted from digital recordings of a sustained /i/ produced at a comfortable pitch and loudness, with F0 controlled so that levels were within ±15% of each participant's comfortable mean level as determined from connected speech. Glottal width (GW), true vocal fold (TVF) length, and TVF width were measured from still frames representing the maximum open phase of the vibratory cycle. To control for anatomic and magnification differences across participants, GW was normalized to TVF length. GW as a ratio of TVF width was also computed for comparison with prior studies.
RESULTS: Mean values and standard deviations were computed for the normalized measures. Paired t tests showed no significant differences between rigid and flexible endoscopy methods. Interrater and intrarater reliability values for raw measurements were found to be high (0.89-0.99).
CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary quantitative data may be helpful in determining normality or abnormality of vocal fold vibration. Results indicate that quantified amplitude of vibration is similar between endoscopic methods, a clinically relevant finding for individuals performing and interpreting stroboscopic assessments.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app