Dyspnea
Conditions
Keywords
dyspnea, speech therapy, communication, aging, breathing, respiratory, intervention, voice
Brief summary
Due to various comorbidities affecting the respiratory system, older speakers are at risk of experiencing breathing discomfort (dyspnea) during high-demand vocal activities such as singing, loud speaking, and speaking while exercising. Dyspnea during speech can promote avoidance of certain situations involving voice production, thus leading to vocal deconditioning and decreased quality of life. The goal of this pilot study is to test the feasibility and acceptability of a 4-week remote group intervention targeting phonatory dyspnea, and to gather preliminary efficacy data. Participants will receive an intervention including a 2-week socialization phase (control condition) and a 4-week speech breathing intervention phase (experimental condition). Both phases will be delivered remotely and in a group setting (10 participants per group).
Interventions
BEHAVIORALSocialization phase
Control condition: does not involve speech-related exercises
BEHAVIORALSpeech breathing intervention
Experimental condition: involves speech-related exercises
Sponsors
University of Delaware
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
50 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* sign the informed consent form * report dyspnea in at least one of the items of the University of Cincinnati Dyspnea Questionnaire referring to speech * be available during the dates of the scheduled group interventions * be aged 50 years or older
Exclusion criteria
* do not have access to a computer and internet connection * present with a known voice pathology (other than age-related vocal fold atrophy) and/or are receiving speech therapy at the time of the study * have a known neurodegenerative disease affecting speech/voice * are a current smoker * are receiving pulmonary rehabilitation at the time of the study or are starting a new medication regimen for a respiratory disease at the time of study onset; * have a hearing loss that is not adequately managed, as judged by the Principal Investigator (PI) * have professional vocal training \[amateur choir singers will not be excluded\] * cannot provide informed consent or easily follow instructions * have any other condition that precludes them from participating in the behavioral interventions, as judged by the PI.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in reported dyspnea | Assessed at baseline, after the 2-week control condition, and after the 4-week experimental condition. | Participant self-ratings of dyspnea on the University of Cincinnati Dyspnea Questionnaire. This questionnaire contains 30 items scored on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all short of breath) to 5 (always short of breath or cannot do). A higher scores indicates greater shortness of breath and therefore greater handicap. |
| Change in reported voice handicap | Assessed at baseline, after the 2-week control condition, and after the 4-week experimental condition. | Participant self-ratings of voice handicap on the Voice Handicap Index-10. The Voice Handicap Index-10 is an ordinal scale that measures the degree of handicap a person experiences because of their voice disorder. Each item is scored on a Likert scale ranging from 0 to 4. The minimum score is 0 and the maximal score 40. A higher score indicates a greater perceived voice handicap. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in reported self-efficacy | Assessed at baseline, after the 2-week control condition, and after the 4-week experimental condition. | Participant self-ratings of self-efficacy for managing their symptoms, using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Self-Efficacy Questionnaire - Managing Symptoms. This questionnaire contains 28 items, each scored on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (I am not at all confident) to 5 (I am very confident). A higher score indicates a greater self-efficacy. |
| Acceptability of the intervention | Assessed after the 4-week experimental condition, at the end of the study period. | Participants' perceived acceptability of the intervention using the Acceptability of Intervention Measure. This questionnaire contains 5 items scored on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). A higher score indicates a greater acceptability. |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed