Stimulability assessment is a common part of the voice evaluation, but little information exists about what is involved in the process, how it is measured, and how it impacts therapeutic decisions. The aim of this study was to establish the frequency, circumstances, techniques, and rationale for stimulability assessment among voice-specialized speech-language pathologists (SLPs).
An anonymized online survey was distributed to voice-specialized SLPs through email lists, online communities, and professional networks. Surveys queried clinical demographic information, respondents’ definition of stimulability, importance of stimulability assessment, frequency with which stimulability assessment is performed for various patient populations, preferred facilitating techniques, importance of stimulability assessment for a variety of clinical goals, and methods of measuring voice stimulability.
Eighty-eight responses were analyzed. All respondents perform voice stimulability assessment, with 97% considering the practice important. Stimulability assessment is completed with all voice disorders and is consistently completed with muscle tension dysphonia, phonotraumatic disorders, vocal fold mobility disorders, and presbyphonia. Ninety-one percent of the sample does not use a structured stimulability assessment protocol. All respondents felt that stimulability is, to some degree, predictive of successful voice therapy outcomes. Resonance modifications and semi-occluded vocal tract techniques were the most commonly used facilitating strategies. Respondents felt that stimulability assessment was very important for assessing patient awareness, estimating prognosis, and identifying training gestures.
Responding voice clinicians felt that stimulability assessment is an important part of the voice evaluation. This study provides information on how stimulability assessment is being used and outlines what is needed to study its impact.
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 access
One-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 Voice
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- Preferred practice patterns for the profession of speech-language pathology [Preferred Practice Pattern].2004 (Available at:)
- Recommended protocols for instrumental assessment of voice: American speech-language-hearing association expert panel to develop a protocol for instrumental assessment of vocal function.Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018; 27: 887-905
- Immediate effect of stimulability assessment on acoustic, aerodynamic, and patient-perceptual measures of voice.J Voice. 2016; 30: 507-e9
- Stimulability: A useful clinical tool.J Commun Disord. 1996; 29: 237-253
- Common practices of voice therapists in the evaluation of patients.J Voice. 2005; 19: 454-469
- Practice patterns of speech-language pathologists in pediatric vocal health.Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2017; 26: 281-300
- The Voice and Voice Disorders.10th ed. Pearson, Hoboken, NJ2020
- Patient-reported factors associated with the onset of hyperfunctional voice disorders.Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2021; 130: 389-394
- Current and emerging concepts in muscle tension dysphonia: a 30-month review.J Voice. 2005; 19: 261-267
- Creating a mastery experience during the voice evaluation.J Voice. 2012; 26: 665.e1-665.e7
- Pre and post stimulation results for dysphonic participants on the multidimensional voice program.Clin Res Open Access. 2016; 2: 1-5
- Pre-and poststimulation study on the phonatory aerodynamic system on participants with dysphonia.J Voice. 2017; 31: 254.e1-254.e9
- The immediate impact of targeted exercises on voice characteristics in female speakers with phonotraumatic vocal fold lesions.J Voice. 2022;
- Immediate effect of laryngeal manual therapy in dysphonic individuals.SciELO Brasil. 2016; 28: 59-65
- Plasticity of voice quality: a prognostic factor for outcome of voice therapy?.J Voice. 2001; 15: 251-256
- A taxonomy of voice therapy.American Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2015; 24: 101-125
- The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners.J Biomed Inform. 2019; 95103208
- Using thematic analysis in psychology.Qual Res Psychol. 2006; 3: 77-101
- Glaspey Dynamic Assessment of Phonology (GDAP): Technical Manual.Academic Therapy Publications, Novato, CA2019
- The narrative language measures: Tools for language screening, progress monitoring, and intervention planning.Perspect Lang Learn Educ. 2012; 19: 119-129
- A study of voice therapy dropout.J Voice. 2009; 23: 337-340
- Differential diagnosis of muscle tension dysphonia and spasmodic dysphonia.Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010; 18: 165-170
- Task specificity in adductor spasmodic dysphonia versus muscle tension dysphonia.Laryngoscope. 2005; 115: 311-316
- Meta-Therapy Applications for the Voice Evaluation.Perspect ASHA Spec Interest Groups. 2022; : 1-5
- Mapping Meta-Therapy in Voice Interventions onto the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System.Semin Speech Lang. 2022; 42: 005-018
Published online: January 28, 2023
Accepted: January 6, 2023
Publication stageIn Press Corrected Proof
Portions of this work were presented at The Fall Voice Conference in San Francisco, CA, October 7-8, 2022.
© 2023 The Voice Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.