Expert's Consensus on Terminology of Auditory Perceptual Assessment in Voice Disorder.
10.3342/kjorl-hns.2017.00815
- Author:
Hye Jin LIM
1
;
Jeong Kyu KIM
;
Gyu Ho JANG
;
Deok Su KIM
;
Chul Hee CHOI
;
Seong Hee CHOI
Author Information
1. Department of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, Daegu Catholic University, School of Medicine, Gyeongsan, Korea. shgrace@cu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Auditory-perceptual judgment;
Voice disorder;
Voice quality
- MeSH:
Auditory Perception;
Consensus*;
Korea;
Methods;
Pathology;
Vocabulary;
Voice Disorders*;
Voice Quality;
Voice*
- From:Korean Journal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
2017;60(12):653-663
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to conduct a preliminary study to develop a standardized guideline for terminology necessary to describe auditory perception qualitatively and quantitatively in voice disorders in the Korean language. SUBJECTS AND METHOD: At first, a subjective questionnaire for Korean translation and definition of 25 auditory perceptual assessment terms proposed by Titze was answered by six speech-language pathologists. Secondly, a new questionnaire that was reconstructed with objective items based on the responses to the first questionnaire was completed by 14 experts who had experience on voice disorder for more than 10 years in Korea. In both questionnaires, the necessity of 32 auditory perceptual assessment terms selected from the 25 terms defined by Titze, GRBAS and CAPE-V was surveyed. RESULTS: The consensus on the Korean translation of auditory perceptual assessment terms was moderate (52.6%) between experts. The terms ‘ rough’ and ‘ shimmer’ demonstrated highest consensus of 85.7%. The consensus on Korean definition of auditory perceptual assessment terms was also moderate (61.6%). The term ‘ yawny’ showed complete consensus (100%). The necessity of auditory perceptual assessment terms varied with terms, but showed high consensus. CONCLUSION: It is necessary to develop and apply various standardized vocabulary terms for clinical evaluation so that they can express pathology and physiological characteristics during vocalization. In addition, despite the fact that there are a lot of auditory-perceptual terms, there is a lack of knowledge about voice quality terms, suggesting the need to promote and educate the developed voice quality terms.
