Muscle Tension Dysphonia
Conditions
Keywords
Muscle tension dysphonia, rehabilitation, treatment
Brief summary
The goal of this study is to evaluate if using evidence-based, standard ingredient and target codes from the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System - Voice Therapy (RTSS-Voice) in standard of care voice therapy documentation can improve outcomes for patients with muscle tension dysphonia (MTD). The main question it aims to answer is: Since the RTSS-Voice will help clinicians think about their treatment more specifically and in relation to nine evidence-based therapies, will its adoption be associated with improved outcomes? Clinicians across five voice centers will be asked to use the RTSS-Voice to document their voice therapy sessions for patients with MTD. Researchers will compare changes in outcomes between two groups of patients: those treated during the clinician's first year using the RTSS-Voice versus those treated during the clinician's second year using the RTSS-Voice.
Detailed description
The purpose of this study is to evaluate if using evidence-based, standard ingredient and target codes from the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System - Voice Therapy (RTSS-Voice) in standard of care voice therapy documentation can improve outcomes for patients with muscle tension dysphonia (MTD). RTSS-Voice adoption is likely to be associated with improved outcomes because it requires clinicians to think about their therapy in relation to nine evidence-based therapies (i.e., increased evidence-based practice) and more carefully consider the specific changes in targets directly related to specific clinical actions, i.e., improved clinical reasoning. Sixty patents will be enrolled per year (at minimum) from each of the five participating voice centers, i.e., 300 patients in Years 1 and 2 (total patients = 600). For each patient, outcomes will be collected before and after therapy including patient-reported vocal functioning, clinician-reported voice quality, an objective measure associated with overall voice quality (Cepstral Peak Prominence/CPP), and total number of sessions. Each voice center uses different patient-reported and clinician-reported measures. Thus, linear regression models will examine changes in outcomes during Year 1 versus Year 2 for each individual site. The different patient- and clinician-reported measures have been found to be highly correlated. Therefore, individual sites will also be pooled together in a mini meta-analysis. Standardized effect sizes (Cohen's d) will be calculated for each site, representing the effect of RTSS-Voice adoption. Using a fixed effects model, an average effect size across sites will be calculated, weighted by sample size. The average effect size across sites will then represent the overall effect of the implementation on vocal functioning, voice quality, CPP, and number of sessions. Power: The investigators anticipate a minimum of 60 patients per site, (total of 300 patients per year). For site-specific analyses, a sample size of 60 patients for each group (Year 1 versus Year 2) is associated with 80% power to detect the smallest clinically meaningful effect size: d = .5. The effect size d = .5 was chosen because it is the smallest effect that is "visible to the naked eye" associated with rejecting the null hypothesis and supporting the alternative hypothesis in rehabilitation treatment studies and used in multiple voice studies.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALStandard of care voice therapy with novice clinician RTSS-Voice documentation
Voice therapy is individually tailored to each patient and typically includes behavioral ingredients (e.g., applying pressure to the anterior neck, practice voicing in various ways, feedback on performance, provide information on the importance of therapy concepts) to modify the patient's auditory, somatosensory, vocal, musculoskeletal, respiratory, and mental functions. During this time, the treating clinicians will be trained to use the RTSS-Voice in their clinical documentation.
BEHAVIORALStandard of care voice therapy with expert clinician RTSS-Voice documentation
Voice therapy is individually tailored to each patient and typically includes behavioral ingredients (e.g., applying pressure to the anterior neck, practice voicing in various ways, feedback on performance, provide information on the importance of therapy concepts) to modify the patient's auditory, somatosensory, vocal, musculoskeletal, respiratory, and mental functions. During this time, the treating clinicians will have completed their RTSS-Voice training and using the RTSS-Voice in their clinical documentation.
Sponsors
Massachusetts General Hospital
Emory University
New York University
University of Utah
University of Wisconsin, Madison
Study design
Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
SEQUENTIAL
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
14 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Diagnosis of primary Muscle Tension Dysphonia (pMTD) * Patients with pMTD will be included regardless of subtype (e.g., functional aphonia, vocal fry, ventricular dysphonia) and they can have secondary diagnoses of reflux.
Exclusion criteria
* Patients diagnosed with pMTD will be excluded if they have secondary diagnoses related to structural, neurological, or respiratory disorders such as laryngitis, obvious vocal fold nodules, polyps, cyst, granuloma, sulci, paradoxical vocal fold motion, chronic cough, confirmed or possible upper airway paralysis/paresis, dysphagia, polypoid corditis, keratosis, presbylarynx, leukoplakia, or history of radiation to the head/neck. Patients with pMTD will be included regardless of subtype (e.g., functional aphonia, vocal fry, ventricular dysphonia) and they can have secondary diagnoses of reflux. * Non-English speakers. The RTSS-Voice's standard and operationalized categories are in English.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Voice Health Index (VHI) | pre-intervention and immediately after the intervention | The VHI consists of 30 Likert questions ranging from 0-4 (0 = never, 1 = almost never, 2 = sometimes, 3 = almost always, 4 = always) that estimate how the patient's vocal function effects his/her daily life. A short-form can be used (the VHI-10) that uses a subset of 10 questions from the 30 total questions. This patient-reported outcome measure will be used to evaluate if the patients perceive that therapy helped them function better in their activities of daily living. |
| Voice-Related Quality of Life (V-RQOL) | pre-intervention and immediately after the intervention | The V-RQOL consists of 10 Likert-style questions ranging from 1-5 (1 = none not a problem at all, 2 = a small amount, 3 = a moderate (medium) problem, 4 = a lot, 5 = problem is "as bad as it can be") that estimate how the subject's vocal function effects his/her daily life. This patient-reported outcome measure will be used to evaluate if the patients perceive that therapy helped them function better in their activities of daily living. |
| Consensus Auditory Perceptual Evaluation of Voice (CAPE-V) | pre-intervention and immediately after the intervention | The CAPE-V consists of 4 perceptually judged 100-mm visual analog scales (Overall dysphonia, Breathiness, Strain, Roughness). The patient's treating voice specialized speech-language pathologist will judge the audio samples. These judgements provide gold-standard, perceptual ratings of voice quality to evaluate if voice therapy is associated with improved voice quality. |
| Grade Roughness Breathiness Asthenia Strain (GRBAS) Scale | pre-intervention and immediately after the intervention | The GRBAS consists of 5 perceptually-judged scales (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, Strain) on a 0-3 Likert scale (0 = normal, 1 = mild severity, 2 = moderate severity, 3 = severe). The patient's treating voice specialized speech language pathologist will judge the audio samples. These judgements provide gold-standard, perceptual ratings of voice quality to evaluate if voice therapy is associated with improved voice quality. |
| Cepstral Peak Prominence (CPP) | pre-intervention and immediately after the intervention | To calculate CPP, all voiced 50 millisecond (ms) frames will undergo two discrete Fourier transforms computed in succession with a logarithmic transformation between them. A regression line is then computed over quefrencies greater than 2 ms (corresponding to a quefrency range minimally affected by subglottal resonances). Finally, the CPP for each frame is defined as the difference, in decibels (dB), between the magnitude of the highest peak and the baseline regression level in the power cepstrum. The peak search is limited to quefrencies between 2.5 ms and 12 ms, corresponding to frequencies of 417 Hertz (Hz) and 83 Hz, respectively. The resulting CPP is an estimate of periodicity in the voice signal, which has strongly correlated to overall dysphonia in multiple previous studies. This will be used to quantitatively evaluate if voice therapy was associated with improved overall voice quality. |
Countries
United States
Contacts
CONTACTJarrad Van Stan, PhD, CCC-SLP
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORJarrad Van Stan, PhD, CCC-SLP
Massachusetts General Hospital
Outcome results
None listed