Summary
Purpose
To investigate the accuracy of the Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI), the Acoustic
Breathiness Index (ABI), and the Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI) for speech-language
pathologist (SLP) decision-making in the evaluation of teachers' voice conditions.
Methods
Cross-sectional observational study with a convenience sample composed of 21 teachers
“fit” in carrying out their work activities as a teacher, and 21 considered “unfit”
for the same. All teachers underwent a voice evaluation, carried out by a voice-specialized
speech-language pathologist. Voice evaluation included the SLP's opinion on whether
the teachers presented “fit” or “unfit” for work. The voice and speech samples used
for the AVQI and ABI scores were the mid-three seconds of a sustained vowel /a/, and
a spontaneous count from 1 to 10. The following parameters were used to extract the
DSI score: mid-three seconds of a sustained vowel /a/, maximum phonation time of a
sustained vowel /a/, ascending vocal glide on the vowel /a/ until reaching the highest
pitch, and sustained vowel /a/ at the softest possible vocal intensity. The t-test
was used to compare the difference between the AVQI and ABI indices. The Mann-Whitney
test was used for the DSI index, with a confidence level of 95%. The receiver operating
characteristic curve (ROC) was used for accuracy analysis.
Results
There was a difference in AVQI values (P=0.008), ABI (P=0.014), and DSI (P=0.000) between groups. The cutoff points that revealed the highest specificity for
the AVQI, ABI, and DSI respectively were 3.33 (sensitivity 57.1% and specificity 90.5%),
4 (sensitivity 57.1% and specificity 85.7%), and 1.62 (sensitivity 71.4% and specificity
90.5%).
Conclusion
The AVQI, ABI, and DSI are instruments that provide robust voice information and can
help speech-language pathologists in their decision-making about whether teachers
must or must not be restricted in their vocal activities at work.
Key Words
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of VoiceAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Epidemiology of voice disorders in teachers and nonteachers in Brazil: prevalence and adverse effects.J Voice. 2012; 26: 665https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2011.09.010
- The prevalence of laryngeal pathology in a treatment-seeking population with dysphonia.Laryngoscope. 2010; 120: 306-312https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.20696
- Variations in intensity, fundamental frequency, and voicing for teachers in occupational versus non-occupational settings.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2010; 53: 862-875https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2009/09-0040
- Voice disorders (dysphonia) in public school female teachers working in belo horizonte: prevalence and associated factors.J Voice. 2008; 22: 676-687https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2007.03.008
- Cartilha institucional da Superintendência Central de Perícia Médica e Saúde Ocupacional (SCPMSO).Belo Horizonte, 2016 (Available at:)
- Avaliação da voz na visão (e no ouvido) do Fonoaudiólogo: saber o que se procura para entender o que se acha.Tópicos em Fonoaudiologia. Lovise, São Paulo1998: 393-413
- Differentiated perceptual evaluation of pathological voice quality: reliability and correlations with acoustic measurements.Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol Bord. 1996; 117: 219-224
- Vocal acoustic analysis – Jitter, shimmer and HNR parameters.Proc Technol. 2013; 9: 1112-1122https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2013.12.124
- Evidence-based clinical voice assessment: a systematic review.Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2013; 22: 212-226https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2012/12-0014
- Auditory-perceptual evaluation of disordered voice quality.Folia Phoniatrica Logopedica. 2009; 61: 49-56https://doi.org/10.1159/000200768
- Desafios e referências na avaliação perceptivo-auditiva da voz.Fundamentos e atualidades em voz Clínica. Thieme Revinter, Rio de Janeiro2019: 9-30
- Acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: a meta-analysis.J Acoust Soc Am. 2009; 126: 2619-2634https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3224706
- Acoustic analysis of voice quality: a tabulation of algorithms 1902-1990.in: Kent RD Ball MJ Voice quality measurement. Singular Publishing Group, San Diego, CA2000: 119-244
- Estimating dysphonia severity in continuous speech: application of a multi-parameter spectral/cepstral model.Clin Ling Phonetics. 2009; 23: 825-841https://doi.org/10.3109/02699200903242988
- The relationship between cepstral peak prominence and selected parameters of dysphonia.J Voice. 2002; 16: 20-27https://doi.org/10.1016/s0892-1997(02)00067-x
- Cepstral measures in the assessment of severity of voice disorders.Codas. 2019; 31: 1-8https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20182018175
- Comparison of cepstral peak prominence measures using the ADSV, SpeechTool, and VoiceSauce acoustic analysis programs in vocally healthy female speakers.Acoustics Australia. 2018; 46: 215-226https://doi.org/10.1007/s40857-018-0139-6
- The Acoustic Voice Quality Index: toward improved treatment outcomes assessment in voice disorders.J Commun Disord. 2010; 43: 161-174https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2009.12.004
- Toward the development of an objective index of dysphonia severity: a four-factor model.Clin Ling Phonetics. 2006; 20: 35-49https://doi.org/10.1080/02699200400008353
- Toward improved ecological validity in the acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: Combining continuous speech and sustained vowels.J Voice. 2009; 24: 540-555https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2008.12.014
- The Acoustic Breathiness Index (ABI): a multivariate acoustic model for breathiness.J Voice. 2017; 31: 511https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.11.017
- The Dysphonia Severity Index: an objective measure of vocal quality based on a multiparameter approach.J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2000; 43: 769-809https://doi.org/10.1044/jslhr.4303.796
- The performance of the acoustic quality index and acoustic breathiness index in synthesized voices.J Voice. 2021; 1: 1https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2021.05.005
- External validation of the Acoustic Voice Quality Index version 03.01 with extended representativity.Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2016; 125: 571-583https://doi.org/10.1177/0003489416636131
Boersma P, Weenink D. Praat: doing phonetics by computer. Version 5.2.25. 2011. Available at: www.praat.org.
- Validation of the acoustic voice quality index, version 03.01, to the Brazilian Portuguese Language.J Voice. 2019; 35: 160https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2019.07.024
- Acoustic voice quality index and acoustic breathiness index: analysis with different speech material in the Brazilian Portuguese.J Voice. 2020; 34: 810https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2019.03.015
- Validation of the acoustic breathiness index to the Brazilian Portuguese language.Logop Phoniatr Vocol. 2021; 1: 1https://doi.org/10.1080/14015439.2020.1864467
- Measuring the Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI) in the Program Praat.J Voice. 2017; 31: 644https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2017.01.002
- A comparison of dysphonia severity index and acoustic voice quality index measures in differentiating normal and dysphonic voices.Laryngology. 2018; 275: 949-958https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-018-4903-x
- Glottic configurations and glottic proportion: an attempt to understand the posterior triangular glottic chink.Revue Otologie Rhinologie Laryngologie (Bord). 1994; 115: 261-266
- The Acoustic Breathiness Index (ABI): a multivariate acoustic model for breathiness.J Voice. 2017; 31: 511.e11-511.e27https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.11.017
- Calibration of clinical audio recording and analysis systems for sound intensity measurement.Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2015; 24: 608-618https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_AJSLP-14-0082
- A comparison of Cohen's Kappa and Gwet's AC1 when calculating inter-rater reliability coefficients: a study conducted with personality disorder samples.BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2013; 13: 1-7https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-61
- Computing inter-rater reliability and its variance in the presence of high agreement.Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2008; 61: 29-48https://doi.org/10.1348/000711006-126600
- Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice. 2. Prentice Hall Health, Upper Saddle River2000
- The Applicability of the dysphonia severity index and the voice handicap index in evaluating effects of voice therapy and phonosurgery.J Voice. 2010; 24: 199-205https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2008.06.007
- Validation of the acoustic voice quality index in the Japanese language.J Voice. 2017; 31: 260.e1-260.e9https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.05.010
- Validation of the acoustic voice quality index, version 03.01, in French.J Voice. 2018; 34: 646https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.12.008
- Accuracy of acoustic voice quality index and its isolated acoustic measures to discriminate the severity of voice disorders.J Voice. 2020; 36: 582https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.08.010
- Validation of the acoustic voice quality index version 03.01 and acoustic breathiness index in German.J Voice. 2018; 34: 157https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.07.026
- Correlation of the Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI), Consensus Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice (CAPE-V), and gender in Brazilians with and without voice disorders.J Voice. 2015; 30: 765https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2015.10.013
- The dysphonia severity index (dsi)—normative values. systematic review and meta-analysis.J Voice. 2022; 36: 143https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.04.010
Article info
Publication history
Published online: January 02, 2023
Accepted:
November 21,
2022
Publication stage
In Press Corrected ProofFootnotes
Financial support: National Council for Scientific and Technological Development – CNPq – Brazil.
Identification
Copyright
© 2022 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of The Voice Foundation.
