Comparison of Clinicians’ Perceptual Evaluations and Patients’ Subjective Evaluations of Voice Disorders

Kim, Jaeock; Choi, Hong-Shik

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Commun Sci Disord. 2009;14(2): 223-235.

Jaeock Kim^` , and Hong-Shik Choi^`

김재옥(Jaeock Kim)| 최홍식(Hong-Shik Choi)

ABSTRACT

Background & Objectives
Among the different types of voice evaluations, objective quantitative evaluations and clinicians’ perceptual evaluations are commonly used. However, patients’ subjective evaluations must be considered to accomplish a more accurate and total assessment of voice disorders. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between clinicians’ perceptual evaluations and patients’ subjective evaluations of voice disorders.
Methods
We enrolled 120 people with voice disorders and 120 people without voice disorders and asked them to fill out Korean Voice Handicap Index (K-VHI) and Korean Voice Related Quality of Life (K-VRQOL) forms. The patients’ voices were perceptually evaluated by an experienced speechlanguage pathologist and an otolaryngologist using GRBAS scales.
Results
There was a low degree of correlation between the G scale on the GRBAS scales and the K-VHI and K-VRQOL self-reports. However, mean scores on both total and subscales in K-VHI and K-VRQOL decreased as the severity of voice disorders on the G scale Increased. In particular, G3 differed significantly from G0, G1, and G2 in the results of both K-VHI and K-VRQOL. In addition, patients who were diagnosed differently had significantly different total and subscale scores on the K-VHI and K-VRQOL, with the exception of the physical score on the K-VHI.
Discussion & Conclusion
There was no significant relationship between clinicians’ perceptual evaluations and patients’ subjective evaluations of voice disorders. The severity of voice disorders assessed by clinicians differed from the voice handicap and voice-related quality of life perceptions of patients. Therefore, there is a need to use various assessment methods when evaluating voice disorders, including patients’ subjective evaluations.