Comparing the Effects of Sensory Tricks on Voice Symptoms in Patients With Laryngeal Dystonia and Essential Vocal Tremor.

IF 2.2 2区医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY

Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research Pub Date : 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1044/2024_JSLHR-24-00476

Kaitlyn Dwenger, Nelson Roy, Skyler G Jennings, Marshall E Smith, Pamela Mathy, Kristina Simonyan, Julie M Barkmeier-Kraemer

{"title":"Comparing the Effects of Sensory Tricks on Voice Symptoms in Patients With Laryngeal Dystonia and Essential Vocal Tremor.","authors":"Kaitlyn Dwenger, Nelson Roy, Skyler G Jennings, Marshall E Smith, Pamela Mathy, Kristina Simonyan, Julie M Barkmeier-Kraemer","doi":"10.1044/2024_JSLHR-24-00476","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This pilot study systematically compared voice symptomatology across varied sensory trick conditions in those with laryngeal dystonia (LD), those with essential vocal tremor (EVT), and vocally normal controls (NCs). Sensory tricks are considered signature characteristics of dystonia and were hypothesized to reduce voice symptoms in those with LD compared to EVT and NC groups.Method: Five participants from each group (LD, EVT, and NC) completed speech recordings under control and sensory trick conditions (delayed auditory feedback [DAF], vibrotactile stimulation [VTS], and nasoendoscopic recordings with and without topical anesthesia). Comparisons between groups and conditions were made using (a) a paired-comparison paradigm (control vs. sensory condition) listener ratings of voice quality, (b) participant-perceived vocal effort ratings, and (c) average smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPS).Results: Participants with EVT displayed significantly worse listener ratings under most sensory trick conditions, whereas participants with LD were rated significantly worse for DAF and VTS conditions only. However, participant vocal effort ratings were similar across all sensory trick conditions. Average CPPS values generally supported listener ratings across conditions and speakers except during DAF, wherein CPPS values increased (i.e., measurably improved voice quality), whereas listener ratings indicated worsened voice quality for both voice disorder groups.Conclusions: Outcomes of this study did not support the hypothesized influences of sensory trick conditions on LD voice symptoms, with both LD and EVT groups experiencing worsened symptoms under VTS and DAF conditions. These adverse effects on voice symptoms warrant further research to further evaluate neural pathways and associated sensorimotor response patterns that distinguish individuals with LD and EVT.Supplemental material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.28462292.","PeriodicalId":51254,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-22"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_JSLHR-24-00476","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This pilot study systematically compared voice symptomatology across varied sensory trick conditions in those with laryngeal dystonia (LD), those with essential vocal tremor (EVT), and vocally normal controls (NCs). Sensory tricks are considered signature characteristics of dystonia and were hypothesized to reduce voice symptoms in those with LD compared to EVT and NC groups.

Method: Five participants from each group (LD, EVT, and NC) completed speech recordings under control and sensory trick conditions (delayed auditory feedback [DAF], vibrotactile stimulation [VTS], and nasoendoscopic recordings with and without topical anesthesia). Comparisons between groups and conditions were made using (a) a paired-comparison paradigm (control vs. sensory condition) listener ratings of voice quality, (b) participant-perceived vocal effort ratings, and (c) average smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPS).

Results: Participants with EVT displayed significantly worse listener ratings under most sensory trick conditions, whereas participants with LD were rated significantly worse for DAF and VTS conditions only. However, participant vocal effort ratings were similar across all sensory trick conditions. Average CPPS values generally supported listener ratings across conditions and speakers except during DAF, wherein CPPS values increased (i.e., measurably improved voice quality), whereas listener ratings indicated worsened voice quality for both voice disorder groups.

Conclusions: Outcomes of this study did not support the hypothesized influences of sensory trick conditions on LD voice symptoms, with both LD and EVT groups experiencing worsened symptoms under VTS and DAF conditions. These adverse effects on voice symptoms warrant further research to further evaluate neural pathways and associated sensorimotor response patterns that distinguish individuals with LD and EVT.

Supplemental material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.28462292.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION

CiteScore

4.10

自引率

19.20%

发文量

538

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Mission: JSLHR publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles on the normal and disordered processes in speech, language, hearing, and related areas such as cognition, oral-motor function, and swallowing. The journal is an international outlet for both basic research on communication processes and clinical research pertaining to screening, diagnosis, and management of communication disorders as well as the etiologies and characteristics of these disorders. JSLHR seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work. Scope: The broad field of communication sciences and disorders, including speech production and perception; anatomy and physiology of speech and voice; genetics, biomechanics, and other basic sciences pertaining to human communication; mastication and swallowing; speech disorders; voice disorders; development of speech, language, or hearing in children; normal language processes; language disorders; disorders of hearing and balance; psychoacoustics; and anatomy and physiology of hearing.