ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Commun Sci Disord. 2018;23(1): 242-253.
Published online March 31, 2018.
doi: https://doi.org/10.12963/csd.18457
Comparison of Perceptual Assessment for Dysarthric Speech: The Detailed and General Assessments
Sae Mi Honga ,b , Pil Yeon Jeonga , and Hyun Sub Sima
aDepartment of Communication Disorders, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea
bDepartment of Rehabilitation of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
Corresponding Author: Hyun Sub Sim ,Tel: +82-2-3277-3538, Fax: +82-2-3277-2122, Email: simhs@ewha.ac.kr
Received January 4, 2018  Revised: February 8, 2018   Accepted February 8, 2018
Share :  
ABSTRACT
Objectives
The Mayo Clinic rating of dysarthria is widely used in the clinical practice. However, because of its low reliability and extensive time requirement, it is necessary to reduce the number of components and improve its reliability. The present study was designed to investigate the difference between a general and detailed assessment protocol and the association of perceptual dimensions with overall impression of speech.
Methods
Twentyeight inexperienced clinicians were asked to perform both protocols twice, separated by a one week interval, with samples of standardized paragraph readings of 15 patients with various degrees and types of dysarthria. The inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability, and different of rating values were compared between both protocols. The correlation between perceptual dimensions and overall impression of speech was also examined.
Results
The general assessment protocol showed higher inter-rater reliability (= .967) and test-retest reliability ( = .620) than the detailed assessment protocol. The mean rating values were similar between the two protocols, but there was a difference in the distribution ratio of rating values. For both protocols, dimensions related to articulation were highly correlated with overall impression of speech, and those related to resonance had low correlation.
Conclusion
The general assessment protocol takes less time and has higher reliability than the detailed assessment protocol. However, since it is limited to evaluating speech characteristics of dysarthria in detail, it should be accompanied by other assessment protocols. The results of the present study are expected to be the basis for further studies.
Keywords: Dysarthria | Auditory perceptual assessment | Mayo Clinic rating system
TOOLS
PDF Links  PDF Links
Full text via DOI  Full text via DOI
Download Citation  Download Citation
CrossRef TDM  CrossRef TDM
Supplement  Supplement
  E-Mail
Share:      
METRICS
0
Crossref
0
Scopus
38
View
8
Download
Editorial office contact information
Department of Speech and Language Pathology
College of Health Sciences, Chosun University,
309, Pilmun-daero, Dong-gu, Gwangju, 61452, Republic of Korea
Tel: +82-502-196-1996   Fax: +82-62-230-6271   E-mail: kjcd@kasa1986.or.kr

Copyright © by Korean Academy of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology. All right reserved.
About |  Browse Articles |  Current Issue |  For Authors and Reviewers
powerd by m2community