Voice Disorderes
Conditions
Interventions
This is a crossover clinical study, with two arms, with a one-week washout, double blind. A total of 40 singers who meet the eligibility criteria will be allocated to carry out two interventions, one
Sponsors
Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
Eligibility
Age
18 Years to 50 Years
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: being a popular singer of popular genres; like pop; stone; hip hop; R&B; country; MPB;countryside; Gospel; from the city of Itabirito; be active in singing for at least 3 years; be between 18 and 50 years old
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: being an opera singer; be in speech therapy; have an infection or allergy that affects the upper airways on the day of collection; not being able to perform the technique; self-declare a disease of cardiovascular origin; neurological; pulmonary; cleft lips and/or palate; facial or rib fractures; be a smoker or have a diagnosis of laryngeal disorder
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Evaluate changes in the participant's self-assessment of voice and breathing using: visual analogue scale (VAS) of voice and breathing before and after performing the techniques; two open (qualitative) post-technical questions: Please, regarding your voice and breathing, indicate whether you feel worse, no change or better; describe three adjectives from this perception; Borg CR10-BR scale adapted for vocal effort for post-technical performance. Vocal effort consists of a series of numbers from 0 to 10, accompanied by descriptions that help the individual to qualify the sensation of vocal effort. Each number on the scale represents an increasing level of perceived effort, where 0 indicates no effort and 10 indicates extremely intense vocal effort;Evaluate changes in the auditory-perceptual assessment of the voice. The pre and post moments will be randomly arranged for evaluating judges and only the researchers will have access to this information. Three speech therapists specializing in voice, with at least five years of experience, will listen and evaluate, through a comparison task, which of the two emissions is worse, does not observe any changes or is better, considering the vocal quality. To determine intra-rater agreement, 20% of the sample will be randomly replicated;Evaluate changes to acoustic measurements. Participants will emit the vowel /a/ sustained in the usual tone, counting numbers and glissando the vowel /a/ from the lowest to the highest. Measurements of fundamental frequency (fo), jitter (%), pitch disturbance quotient (PPQ%), Shimmer (%), amplitude disturbance quotient (APQ%) and noise-harmonic ratio (NHR dB) and cepstral measurements, Cepstral Peak Prominence (CPP) and Cepstral Peak Prominence-Smoothed (CPPS), before and after the techniques;Evaluate changes in peak expiratory flow, the maximum airflow speed achieved during a forced and rapid expiration, immediately after a maximum inspiration. To analyze the result, the percentage of lung capac | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Secondary outcomes are not expected | — |
Countries
Brazil
Contacts
Public ContactLeandro Henrique Dantas
Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
Outcome results
None listed