Age-Related Dysphonia, Presbylarynx
Conditions
Brief summary
The objectives for this research are to determine the mechanisms by which specific therapy tasks improve voice in age-related dysphonia, and the conditions that limit the extent of improvement. The central hypothesis is that targeted therapy tasks will improve voice, and that severity will determine the extent of improvement.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALVoice therapy: respiratory
Abdominal voice onset
BEHAVIORALVoice therapy: glottal closure
Pulling/pushing task
BEHAVIORALVoice therapy: loud
Assertive task
BEHAVIORALVoice therapy: Semiocclusion
Semi-occluded vocal tract
Sponsors
Mayo Clinic
University of Arizona
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Masking description
Participants in the perceptual studies rating audio and visual files will be masked.
Intervention model description
All participants receive every intervention in randomized order
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
65 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Adults in age range who volunteer * Can understand and complete directions presented in English * People with voice disorder associated with advancing age will be included, including bowing, incomplete closure, mild edema, erythema, signs of laryngopharyngeal reflux.
Exclusion criteria
* Laryngeal differences not related to aging (e.g., vocal fold paralysis, moderate-severe edema, lesions, leukoplakia, dysplasia, Parkinson disease) * Known history of stroke, brain injury, or other neurological disorder
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Relative glottal gap from laryngeal high-speed videoendoscopy | End of year 3 | — |
| Perceived voice quality | End of year 3 | Participants will score the construct of overall voice quality using a technique called sort and rate in which listeners move icons representing each sound along a line. They align the icons so that best voices are on one side and worst voices are on the other. The distance between the icons represents how much better or worse one sound is than the other. There are no units to the scale. Rankings from all listeners are combined using the statistical technique of multidimensional scaling. The result is a ranked value for each sound file (i.e., voice production) that shows how different they are. There is no highest or lowest value. |
| Acoustic measure of voice quality (Cepstral Peak Prominence) | End of year 3 | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Open quotient from laryngeal high-speed videoendoscopy | End of year 3 |
| Fundamental frequency standard deviation from laryngeal high-speed videoendoscopy | End of year 3 |
| Speed index from laryngeal high-speed videoendoscopy | End of year 3 |
| Maximum area declination ratefrom laryngeal high-speed videoendoscopy | End of year 3 |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed