Psychometric Characteristics of Different Versions of Vocal Tract Discomfort (VTD) Scale: A Systematic Review
,
Abstract
Background: This review compare different Vocal Tract Discomfort (VTD) versions. This comparison is based on their validity and reliability parameters in the translation and adaptation process. We aimed to prepare numerical evidence to prove the validity of this easy screening tool. VTD is able to perform an accurate diagnosis of voice discomforts, particularly in primary stages.
Methods: Articles were selected from databases including Google Scholar, PubMed, Science Direct and Scopus. Our relevant papers were gathered by searching the phrase: VTD in titles, abstracts, and keys. Studies not followed an adaptive procedure were excluded. Based on the selection criteria, out of 23 collected articles, eight were studied in this review.
Results: Standard psychometric protocol steps were followed in all selected articles and simultaneously high reliability and validity were reported in their translation procedure. Such analogous results may confirm the efficacy of this research tool.
Conclusion: This review affirms VTD, perceptual patient-based scale, as a valuable evaluation tool to investigate the occurrence of voice disorders. Based on its structure and performance, VTD can work as a quick and precise source for predicting vocal discomforts. Moreover, this capability can help professional therapists to plan more efficient treatment procedures. The other important advantage of VTD is its diagnostic and prognostic capacity to inform patients about their current and future conditions so that they would be motivated to follow treatment procedures more consistently.
2. Ma EP, Yiu EM (2001). Voice activity and participation profile: assessing the impact of voice disorders on daily activities. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 44(3), 511–24.
3. Behlau M, Zambon F, Moreti F, et al (2017). Voice self-assessment protocols: differ-ent trends among organic and behavioral dysphonias. J Voice, 31(1), 112-e13.
4. Roy N, Weinrich B, Gray SD, et al (2002). Voice amplification versus vocal hygiene instruction for teachers with voice disor-ders: a treatment outcomes study. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 45(4), 625–38.
5. Francis DO, Daniero JJ, Hovis KL, et al (2017). Voice-related patient-reported outcome measures: a systematic review of instrument development and validation. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 60(1), 62-88.
6. Khatoonabadi AR, Khoramshahi H, Khod-dami SM, et al (2018). Patient-based as-sessment of effectiveness of voice thera-py in vocal mass lesions with secondary muscle tension dysphonia. Iran J Otorhino-laryngol, 30(98):131-137.
7. Khoramshahi H, Khatoonabadi AR, Khod-dami SM, et al (2018). Responsiveness of Persian version of consensus auditory perceptual evaluation of voice (CAPE-V), Persian version of voice handicap index (VHI), and Praat in vocal mass lesions with muscle tension dysphonia. J Voice, 32(6):770.e21-770.e30.
8. Tanner K, Milstein CF, Smith ME (2018). Assessment and Management of Muscle Tension Dysphonia: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Perspect ASHA Spec Interest Groups, 3(3):77-81.
9. Cox RM, Gilmore C, Alexander GC (1991). Comparison of two questionnaires for patient-assessed hearing aid benefit. J Am Acad Audiol, 2(3):134-45.
10. Lukaschyk J, Brockmann-Bauser M, Beushausen U (2017). Transcultural adap-tation and validation of the German ver-sion of the Vocal Tract Discomfort Scale. J Voice, 31(2):261.e1-261.e8.
11. Oates J (2009). Auditory-perceptual evalua-tion of disordered voice quality. Folia Pho-niatr Logop, 61(1):49-56.
12. Mathieson L (1993). Vocal tract discomfort in hyperfunctional dysphonia. J Voice, 2:40-48.
13. de Oliveira Lemos I, da Cunha Pereira G, et al (2017). Effects of a voice therapy pro-gram for patients with muscle tension dysphonia. Folia Phoniatr Logop, 69(5-6):239-245.
14. Khoddami SM, Nakhostin Ansari N, Izadi F, et al (2013). The assessment methods of laryngeal muscle activity in muscle ten-sion dysphonia: a review. Scientific-WorldJournal, 2013:507397.
15. Kunduk M, Fink DS, McWhorter AJ (2016). Primary muscle tension dysphonia. Cur-rent Otorhinolaryngology Reports, 4(3), 175-182.
16. Roy N, Gouse M, Mauszycki SC, et al (2005). Task specificity in adductor spas-modic dysphonia versus muscle tension dysphonia. Laryngoscope, 115(2):311-6.
17. Roy N, Barkmeier-Kraemer J, Eadie T, et al (2013). Evidence-based clinical voice as-sessment: a systematic review. Am J Speech Lang Pathol, 22(2): 212–26.
18. Sobol M, Sielska-Badurek EM, Rzepakow-ska A, et al (2020). Normative Value of SVHI-10. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Voice, 34(5):808.e25-808.e28.
19. Dabirmoghaddam P, Hassan Khoramshahi H, Dehqan A, et al (2020). Construct and discriminant validity of the Persian ver-sion of the consensus auditory perceptual evaluation of voice (CAPE-V). J Voice, S0892-1997(20)30367-2.
20. Darawsheh WB, Natour YS, Sada EG (2018). Applicability of the Arabic version of Vocal Tract Discomfort Scale (VTDS) with student singers as professional voice users. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol, 43(2): 80-91.
21. Luyten A, Bruneel L, Meerschman I, et al (2016). Prevalence of vocal tract discom-fort in the Flemish population without self-perceived voice disorders. J Voice, 30(3):308-14.
22. Niebudek-Bogusz E, Woźnicka E, Wiktorowicz J, et al (2012). Applicability of the Polish Vocal Tract Discomfort (VTD) scale in the diagnostics of occupa-tional dysphonia. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol, 37(4):151-7.
23. Santi MA, Romano A, Dajer ME, et al (2020). Vocal tract discomfort scale: vali-dation of the argentine version. J Voice, 34(1):158.e1-158.e7.
24. Torabi H, Khoddami SM, Ansari NN, et al (2016). The Vocal Tract Discomfort Scale: validity and reliability of the Persian version in the assessment of patients with muscle tension dysphonia. J Voice, 30(6): 711-716.
25. Gaasland CR, Birkeland IK (2018). Norwe-gian translation and validation of the Au-dio Tract Disorder Self-Assessment Scale (VTDS-N) [Master Thesis]. School of Psychology, the University of Bergen, Norway.
26. Robotti C, Mozzanica F, Pozzali I, et al (2019). Cross-cultural adaptation and val-idation of the Italian Version of the vocal tract Discomfort Scale (I-VTD). J Voice, 33(1), 115-123.
27. Asar S, Jalalpour S, Ayoubi F, et al (2016). PRISMA; Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. JRUMS, 15 (1):68-80.
28. Sohrabi MR (2013). Principles of writing a review article. Pajoohandeh J, 18(2), 52-6.
29. Khoramshahi H, Dehqan A, Scherer RC, et al (2021). Comparison of vocal fatigue and vocal tract discomfort between teachers of normal pupils and teachers of mentally disabled pupils. Eur Arch Otorhi-nolaryngol, 278(7):2429-2436.
30. McDonald JD (2008). Measuring personality constructs: The advantages and disad-vantages of self-reports, informant re-ports and behavioral assessments. En-quire, 1(1):1-19.
31. Lee HN, Yoo JY, Han JH, et al (2020). Transcultural Adaptation and Validation of the Korean Version of the Vocal Tract Discomfort Scale. J Voice, S0892-1997(20)30158-2.
| Files | ||
| Issue | Vol 51 No 1 (2022) | |
| Section | Review Article(s) | |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v51i1.8290 | |
| Keywords | ||
| Vocal tract discomfort (VTD) Translation Validity Reliability Voice disorder Adaptation Muscle tension dysphonia (MTD) | ||
| Rights and permissions | |
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
