Variability of Electroglottographic Glottal Closed Quotients: Necessity of Standardization to Obtain Normative Values

Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery

Volumn 130, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 349-352

  Kania, Romain E ^b   Hans, Stéphane ^b   Hartl, Dana M ^b   Clement, Philippe ^b   Crevier Buchman, Lise ^b   Brasnu, Daniel F ^a  

^a HÔPITAL EUROPÉEN GEORGES POMPIDOU   (France)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; GLOTTIS; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LARYNGOGRAPHY; MALE; MEASUREMENT; NORMAL HUMAN; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; STANDARDIZATION; VOWEL;

ADULT; ELECTRIC IMPEDANCE; ELECTROMYOGRAPHY; GLOTTIS; HUMANS; MALE; PHONATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REFERENCE VALUES; VOICE QUALITY;

EID: 1542317857     PISSN: 08864470     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archotol.130.3.349     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Peterson KL, Verdolini-Marston K, Barkmeier JM, Hoffman HT. Comparison of aerodynamic and electroglottographic parameters in evaluating clinically relevant voicing patterns. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1994;103:335-346.
2. Fourcin AJ, Abberton E. First applications of a new laryngograph. Med Biol Illus. 1971;21:172-182.
3. Baken RJ. Electroglottography. J Voice. 1992;6:98-110.
4. Fourcin AJ. Laryngographic examination of vocal fold vibration. London, England: Oxford University Press Inc; 1974:315-333.
5. Fourcin AJ. Laryngographic assessment of phonatory function. In: Ludlow CL, Hart MO, eds. Proceedings of the Conference of the Assessment of Vocal Pathology, Rockville, Md, December 1981. Vol 11. Rockville, Md: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association; 1981:116-127.
6. Baer T, Lofqvist A, McGarr NS. Laryngeal vibrations. J Acoust Soc Am. 1983;73:1304-1308.
7. Childers DG, Hicks DM, Moore GP, Alsaka YA. A model for vocal fold vibratory motion, contact area, and the electroglottogram. J Acoust Soc Am. 1986;80:1309-1320.
8. Gilbert HR, Potter CR, Hoodin R. Laryngograph as a measure of vocal fold contact area. J Speech Hear Res. 1984;27:178-182.
9. Lecluse FLE, Brocaar MP, Verschuure J. The electrography and its relation to glottal activity. Folia Phoniatr. 1975;27:215-224.
10. Rothenberg M. Some relations between glottal airflow and vocal fold contact area. In: Ludlow CL, Hart MO, eds. Proceedings of the Conference on the Assessment of Vocal Pathology, Rockville, Md, December 1981. Vol 11. Rockville, Md: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association; 1981:88-96.
11. Childers DG, Krishnamurthy AK. A critical review of electroglottography. Crit Rev Biomed Eng. 1985;12:131-161.
12. Orlikoff RF. Assessment of the dynamics of vocal fold contact from the electroglottogram: data from normal male subjects. J Speech Hear Res. 1991;34:1066-1072.
13. Scherer R, Vail V, Rockwell B. Examination of the laryngeal adduction measure EGGW. NCVS Stat Prog Rep. 1993;5:73-82.
14. Rothenberg M, Mahshie JJ. Monitoring vocal fold abduction through vocal fold contact area. J Speech Hear Res. 1988;31:338-351.
15. Hicks D. Functional voice assessment. NIDCD Monogr. 1991;1:204-209.
16. Houben GB, Buekers R, Kingma H. Characterization of the electroglottographic waveform. Folia Phoniatr. 1992;44:269-281.
17. Colton RH, Conture EG. Problems and pitfalls of electroglottography. J Voice. 1990;4:10-24.
18. Titze IR. Interpretation of the electroglottograph signal. J Voice. 1990;4:1-9.
19. Higgins MB, Saxman JH. Inverse-filtered airflow and EGG measures for sustained vowels and syllables. J Voice. 1993;7:47-53.
20. Marasek K. An attempt to classify Lx signals. In: Pardo JM, Enriquez E, Ortega J, Ferreiros J, Macias J, Valverde FJ, eds. Proceedings of Eurospeech '95, Madrid, Spain, 18-21 September, 1995. Bonn, Germany: ISCA Archive; 1995:1729-1732.
21. Hanson DG, Gerratt BR, Berke GS. Frequency, intensity, and target matching effects on photoglottographic measures of open quotient and speed quotient. J Speech Hear Res. 1990;33:45-50.
22. Sulter AM, Wit HP. Glottal volume velocity waveform characteristics in subjects with and without vocal training, related to gender, sound intensity, fundamental frequency, and age. J Acoust Soc Am. 1996;100:3360-3373.
23. Murty GE, Carding PN, Kelly PJ, Lancaster P. The effect of intensity on combined glottography. Clin Otolaryngol. 1991;16:399-400.
24. Dejonckere PH. Comparison of two methods of photoglottography in relation to electroglottography. Folia Phoniatr. 1981;33:338-347.
25. Dejonckere PH, Lebacq J. Electrography and vocal nodules: an attempt to quantify the shape of the signal. Folia Phoniatr. 1985;37:195-200.
26. Painter C. Electroglottogram waveform types. Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 1988;245:116-121.
27. Painter C. Electroglottogram waveform types of untrained speakers. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 1990;247:168-173.
28. Gerratt BR, Hanson DG, Berke GS. Laryngeal configuration associated with glottography. Am J Otolaryngol. 1988;9:173-179.
29. Hanson DG, Jiang J, D'Agostino M, Herzon G. Clinical measurement of mucosal wave velocity using simultaneous photoglottography and laryngostroboscopy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1995;104:340-349.
30. Sodersten M, Hertegard S, Hammarberg B. Glottal closure, transglottal airflow, and voice quality in healthy middle-aged women. J Voice. 1995;9:182-197.
31. Schutte H, Svec J, Sram F. First results of clinical application of videokymography. Laryngoscope. 1998;108:1206-1210.
32. Verdonck-de Leeuw IM, Festen JM, Mahieu HF. Deviant vocal fold vibration as observed during videokymography. J Voice. 2001;15:313-322.