Walton Chloe, Carding Paul, Conway Erin, Flanagan Kieran, Blackshaw Helen
School of Allied Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University (ACU), Brisbane, Australia.
Ear Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Laryngoscope. 2019 Jan;129(1):187-197. doi: 10.1002/lary.27434. Epub 2018 Sep 19.
Unilateral vocal fold paralysis (UVFP) typically results in marked changes in voice quality and performance and has a significant impact on quality of life. Treatment approaches generally aim to restore glottal closure for phonation and improve vocal function. There are a wide range of voice outcome measures that are available to measure the treatment effect. Careful selection of voice outcome measures is required to ensure that they are adequate for purpose and are psychometrically sound to detect the treatment effect. This article aims to critically evaluate the literature for voice outcome measures that are used for patients with UVFP.
Systematic review.
Nine databases were searched for UVFP treatment studies published since 2003 (n = 2,484 articles). These articles and their references were screened using inclusion/exclusion criteria, including population characteristics, treatment, voice outcomes, and study findings. Data from the included articles was extracted and appraised with respect to multidimensionality, timing, selection rationale, validity, reliability, and responsiveness to change of the voice outcome measures.
A total of 29 studies met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. These studies showed considerable variability in the rationale, selection, and application of voice outcome measures for reporting the treatment effect for patients with UVFP.
There is currently a significant disparity in the selection and use of voice outcome measures for patients with UVFP. A set of principles around selection rationale, validity, reliability, and responsiveness to change is proposed to enhance the judicious selection of voice outcome measures for this patient group. Laryngoscope, 129:187-197, 2019.
单侧声带麻痹（UVFP）通常会导致嗓音质量和表现发生显著变化，并对生活质量产生重大影响。治疗方法一般旨在恢复声门闭合以进行发声，并改善嗓音功能。有多种嗓音结果测量方法可用于评估治疗效果。需要仔细选择嗓音结果测量方法，以确保其适用于目的且在心理测量学上合理，能够检测到治疗效果。本文旨在对用于UVFP患者的嗓音结果测量方法的文献进行批判性评估。
系统评价。
检索了九个数据库，查找自2003年以来发表的UVFP治疗研究（共2484篇文章）。使用纳入/排除标准对这些文章及其参考文献进行筛选，包括人群特征、治疗方法、嗓音结果和研究结果。提取纳入文章的数据，并就嗓音结果测量方法的多维性、时间安排、选择理由、有效性、可靠性和对变化的反应性进行评估。
共有29项研究符合系统评价的纳入标准。这些研究表明，在用于报告UVFP患者治疗效果的嗓音结果测量方法的理由、选择和应用方面存在很大差异。
目前，UVFP患者在嗓音结果测量方法的选择和使用上存在显著差异。提出了一套围绕选择理由、有效性、可靠性和对变化的反应性的原则，以加强对该患者群体嗓音结果测量方法的明智选择。《喉镜》，2019年，129卷：187 - 197页。
