Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol.  2017 Sep;10(3):278-282. 10.21053/ceo.2015.01900.

Differences of the Voice Parameters Between the Population of Different Hearing Tresholds: Findings by Using the Multi-Dimensional Voice Program

• Akil F
• Yollu U
• Ozturk O
• Yener M

• KMID: 2395744
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.21053/ceo.2015.01900

Abstract

OBJECTIVES
To compare voice parameters in subjects with different hearing level.
METHODS
The evaluation consisted of Multi-Dimensional Voice Program (MDVP) and electroglottography. Group 1 consisted of normal hearing subjects which is bilateral average hearing better than 25 decibels (dB) whereas group 2 consisted of patients who have bilateral average hearing between the 25 and 60 dB and group 3 consisted of patients who have bilateral average hearing between the 60 and 90 dB. The evaluations were performed on males and females separately.
RESULTS
In female subjects, fundamental frequency (F0), absolute jitter, %jitter and soft phonation index (SPI) were significantly different between the group 1 and group 2. Also, we detected significant difference on maximum phonation time (MPT), fundamental frequency, absolute jitter and %jitter, and variable F0 (vF0) values between group 1 and group 3. Male subjects demonstrated significant difference between the group 1 and group 2 in MPT, absolute jitter, %jitter, vF0, and SPI parameters. Between the group 3 and group 1; differences in absolute jitter, %jitter, shimmer, %shimmer, vF0, and SPI were also significant.
CONCLUSION
This study concluded that even mild to moderate hearing losses may affect voice patterns in adults and also females and males react differently to hearing loss in some parameters.

Keyword

Voice; Hearing Loss; Adult; Sex

MeSH Terms

Adult
Female
Hearing Loss
Hearing*
Humans
Male
Phonation
Voice*

Reference

1. Lejska M. Voice field measurements: a new method of examination: the influence of hearing on the human voice. J Voice. 2004; Jun. 18(2):209–15.

2. Yates AJ. Delayed auditory feedback. Psychol Bull. 1963; May. 60:213–32.

3. Siegel GM, Pick HL Jr. Auditory feedback in the regulation of voice. J Acoust Soc Am. 1974; Nov. 56(5):1618–24.

4. Angelocci AA, Kopp GA, Holbrook A. The vowel formants of deaf and normal-hearing eleven- to fourteen-year-old boys. J Speech Hear Disord. 1964; May. 29:156–60.

5. Giusti MC, Padovani MM, Behlau M, Granato L. The voice of hearing impaired children. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2001; Jan-Feb. 67(1):29–35.

6. Mathers C, Smith A, Concha M. Global burden of hearing loss in the year 2000. Geneva: World Health Organization;2000.

7. Schutte HK, Seidner W. Recommendation by the Union of European Phoniatricians (UEP): standardizing voice area measurement/phonetography. Folia Phoniatr (Basel). 1983; 35(6):286–8.

8. Leder SB, Spitzer JB, Kirchner JC. Speaking fundamental frequency of postlingually profoundly deaf adult men. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1987; May-Jun. 96(3 Pt 1):322–4.

9. Dehqan A, Scherer RC. Objective voice analysis of boys with profound hearing loss. J Voice. 2011; Mar. 25(2):e61–5.

10. Ubrig MT, Goffi-Gomez MV, Weber R, Menezes MH, Nemr NK, Tsuji DH, et al. Voice analysis of postlingually deaf adults pre- and postcochlear implantation. J Voice. 2011; Nov. 25(6):692–9.

11. Rhys Evans PH, Stafford N, Waldron J. Surgical and pathophysiological considerations. In : Singh W, Soutar DS, editors. Functional surgery of the larynx and pharynx. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann;1993. p. 3–17.

12. Baken RJ, Orlikoff RF. Clinical measurement of speech and voice. 2nd ed. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group;2000.

13. Yuceturk AV, Gunhan K. Multidimensional assessment of voice and speech after supracricoid laryngectomy with cricohyoidopexy. J Laryngol Otol. 2004; Oct. 118(10):791–5.

14. Dejonckere PH. Perceptual and laboratory assessment of dysphonia. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2000; Aug. 33(4):731–50.

15. Selleck MA, Sataloff RT. The impact of the auditory system on phonation: a review. J Voice. 2014; Nov. 28(6):688–93.

16. Lee GS. Variability in voice fundamental frequency of sustained vowels in speakers with sensorineural hearing loss. J Voice. 2012; Jan. 26(1):24–9.

17. Silver CE. Laryngeal cancer. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers;1991.

18. Ferrand CT. Harmonics-to-noise ratio: an index of vocal aging. J Voice. 2002; Dec. 16(4):480–7.

19. Bench RJ. Communication skills in hearing-impaired children. London: Whurr Publishers;1992.

20. Mora R, Crippa B, Cervoni E, Santomauro V, Guastini L. Acoustic features of voice in patients with severe hearing loss. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012; Feb. 41(1):8–13.

21. Orlikoff RF. Assessment of the dynamics of vocal fold contact from the electroglottogram: data from normal male subjects. J Speech Hear Res. 1991; Oct. 34(5):1066–72.