Acoustical analysis and perceptual evaluation of tracheoesophageal prosthetic voice

Journal of Voice

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 239-248

  Van As, Corina J ^a,b   Hilgers, Frans J M ^a,c   Verdonck de Leeuw, Irma M ^b   Koopmans van Beinum, Florien J ^b  

^a ANTONI VAN LEEUWENHOEK HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c NETHERLANDS CANCER INSTITUTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Acoustical analysis; Perceptual evaluations; Provox voice prosthesis; Total laryngectomy; Voice quality

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTICS; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; LARYNGECTOMY; LARYNX PROSTHESIS; MALE; PERCEPTION; PHONATION; SPEECH ANALYSIS; VOICE;

EID: 0031748897     PISSN: 08921997     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0892-1997(98)80044-1     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Hilgers FJM, Balm AJM. Long-term results of vocal rehabilitation after total laryngectomy with the low-resistance, in-dwelling Provox® voice prosthesis system. Clin Otolaryngol 1993;18:517-23.
2. Gates GA, Ryan W, Cooper JC Jr, et al. Current status of laryngectomee rehabilitation: I. results of therapy. Am J Otolaryngol 1982;3:1-7.
3. Gates GA, Hearne EM. Predicting esophageal speech. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1982;91:454-7.
4. Gates GA, Ryan W, Cantu E, Hearne E. Current status of laryngectomee rehabilitation: II. causes of failure. Am J Otolaryngol 1982;3:8-14.
5. Hilgers FJM, Ackerstaff AH, Aaronson NK, Schouwenburg PF, van Zandwijk N. Physical and psychosocial consequences of total laryngectomy. Clin Otolaryngol 1990;15:421-5.
6. Hilgers FJM, Aaronson NK, Ackerstaff AH, Schouwenburg PF, van Zandwijk N. The influence of a heat and moisture exchanger (HME) on respiratory symptoms after total laryngectomy. Clin Otolaryngol 1991;16:152-6.
7. Ackerstaff AH, Hilgers FJM, Aaronson NK, Balm AJM, van Zandwijk N. Improvements in respiratory and psychosocial functioning following total laryngectomy by the use of a heat and moisture exchanger (HME). Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1993;102:878-83.
8. Pindzola RH, Cain BH. Acceptability ratings of tracheoesophageal speech. Laryngoscope 1988;98:394-7.
9. Hammarberg B, Lundstrom E, Nord L. Intelligibility and acceptability of esophageal and tracheoesophageal speech, related to acoustic characteristics. Proceedings of the XXII IALP Congress, Hannover, 1992.
10. Robbins J, Fisher HB, Blom EC, Singer MI. A comparative acoustic study of normal, esophageal, and tracheoesophageal speech production. J Speech Hear Disord 1984;49:202-10.
11. Sanderson RJ, Anderson SJ, Denholm S, Kerr AIG. The assessment of alaryngeal speech. Clin Otolaryngol 1993;18: 181-3.
12. Titze IR. Summary statement. Workshop on Acoustic Voice Analysis. National Center for Voice and Speech, Wendell Johnson Speech and Hearing Center, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa; February 17th, 18th, 1994:26-32.
13. Qi Y, Weinberg B. Characteristics of voicing source wave-forms produced by esophageal and tracheoesophageal speakers. J Speech Hear Disord 1995;38:536-48.
14. Hilgers FJM, Schouwenburg PF. A new low-resistance, self retaining prosthesis (Provox®) for voice rehabilitation after total laryngectomy. Laryngoscope 1990;100:1203-7.
15. Nieboer GLJ, De Graaf T, Schutte HK. Esophageal voice quality judgements by means of the semantic differential. J Phonet 1988;16:417-36.
16. Williams SC, Scanio TS, Ritterman SI. Temporal and perceptual characteristics of tracheoesophageal voice. Laryngoscope 1989;99:846-50.
17. Sato K, Hirano M. Age-related changes of the macula flava of the human vocal fold. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1995; 104:839-44.
18. Hilgers FJM, Cornelissen MW, Balm AJM. Aerodynamic characteristics of the Provox® low-resistance indwelling voice prosthesis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 1993;250:375-8.
19. Wolfe V, Ratusnik DL. Acoustic and perceptual measurements of roughness influencing judgment of pitch. J Speech Hear Disord 1988;53:15-22.
20. Verdonck-de Leeuw IM, Koopmans-van Beinum FJ. Voice quality before and after radiotherapy: various acoustical, clinical, and perceptual pitch measures. Proceedings of the Institute of Phonetic Sciences. University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands 1995;19:1-9.