4.0 Article

Objective Acoustic-Phonetic Speech Analysis in Patients Treated for Oral or Oropharyngeal Cancer

期刊

FOLIA PHONIATRICA ET LOGOPAEDICA
卷 61, 期 3, 页码 180-187

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000219953

关键词

Head and neck cancer; Radiotherapy; Surgical reconstruction; Speech quality; Acoustic analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Speech impairment often occurs in patients after treatment for head and neck cancer. New treatment modalities such as surgical reconstruction or (chemo) radiation techniques aim at sparing anatomical structures that are correlated with speech and swallowing. In randomized trials investigating efficacy of various treatment modalities or speech rehabilitation, objective speech analysis techniques may add to improve speech outcome assessment. The goal of the present study is to investigate the role of objective acoustic-phonetic analyses in a multidimensional speech assessment protocol. Patients and Methods: Speech recordings of 51 patients (6 months after reconstructive surgery and postoperative radiotherapy for oral or oropharyngeal cancer) and of 18 control speakers were subjectively evaluated regarding intelligibility, nasal resonance, articulation, and patient-reported speech outcome (speech subscale of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Head and Neck 35 module). Acoustic-phonetic analyses were performed to calculate formant values of the vowels /a, i, u/, vowel space, air pressure release of /k/ and spectral slope of /x/. Results: Intelligibility, articulation, and nasal resonance were best predicted by vowel space and /k/. Within patients, /k/ and /x/ differentiated tumor site and stage. Various objective speech parameters were related to speech problems as reported by patients. Conclusion: Objective acoustic-phonetic analysis of speech of patients is feasible and contributes to further development of a speech assessment protocol. Copyright (C) 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据