Functional Voice Disorder
Conditions
Keywords
Voice disorder, Teacher's voice, Voice SPL (Voice sound pressure level), Voice F0 (Voice fundamental frequency), Voice therapy, Voice accumulator, Activity noise, Classroom
Brief summary
Two voice therapy methods are compared. Activity noise levels and vocal load of teachers during teaching in primary school classrooms are evaluated. Acoustic and Workshop Interventions are implemented in order to reduce noise level during lesson.
Detailed description
Due to the voice disorders, teachers are a major customer group for voice therapy. The main part of the study is comparison of two voice therapy methods. There are several factors in the classroom that increase teacher's risk of voice disorders. One of the most significant is high noise level during lessons. This study explores the noise conditions the teachers are working in and how these conditions are related to the voice parameters and symptoms. Finally, the study aims to determine whether classroom noise level can be lowered by improving classroom acoustics and by noise reducing workshops for teachers and pupils.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALVoice therapy
Voice therapy with direct and indirect therapy elements.
BEHAVIORALVoice therapy with carryover strategies
Voice therapy with direct and indirect therapy elements and supplementary tasks and reminders.
OTHERControl group
No therapy during eight weeks. After the control period half of the group will be provided with Voice therapy and half with Voice therapy with carryover strategies.
Sponsors
Tampere University
Oulu University Hospital
Umeå University
Sonvox AB
University of Oulu
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)
Masking description
Participants are not told what kind of a therapy they are receiving.
Intervention model description
Participants are randomly divided into three groups. Group 1: Voice therapy. Group 2: Voice therapy with carryover strategies (supplementary tasks and reminders). Group 3. Controls. No treatment during control period. After the control period participants are having Voice therapy or Voice therapy with carryover strategies.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Female teachers or teachers of special needs children from elementary schools * Voice symptoms and willingness to participate in voice therapy * Mother tongue Finnish * No hearing loss, no need to use a hearing aid * Non-smoking * No neurological diseases * No voice therapy during past year * Successful phoniatric examination with rigid laryngoscopy or nasal endoscopy
Exclusion criteria
* Mother tongue other than Finnish * Need to use a hearing aid * Need for medical treatment in the larynx * Abnormalities of the larynx * Vocal cord paresis * Laryngitis * Posterior hypertrophy
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| The change of the well-being of the teachers' voice. | Up to one week before the interventions, up to one week after the interventions, 6 months after the interventions, 1 year and 2 years after the interventions and up to one week after the control time (concerning control group). | Subjective evaluation.Data collected with a questionnaire (Voice Activity and Participation Profile, VAPP) from the participants, answers given on a visual analogical scale (VAS) of 100 mm (0 = no disorder, 100 = extreme disorder). |
Outcome results
None listed