The effect of obturator bulb height on speech in maxillectomy patients

Journal of Oral Rehabilitation

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 185-195

  Kwon, H B ^a   Chang, S W ^b   Lee, S H ^b  

^a Seoul National University   (South Korea)

^b Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Acoustic analysis; Maxillectomy; Nasalance; Obturator; Obturator height; Speech

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MALE; MAXILLA; MAXILLA TUMOR; MIDDLE AGED; PHONETICS; PHYSIOLOGY; PLASTIC SURGERY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SKIN TRANSPLANTATION; SPEECH; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; TIME; TOOTH PROSTHESIS; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY; VOICE;

ADULT; AGED; DENTAL PROSTHESIS DESIGN; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; JAW RELATION RECORD; MALE; MAXILLA; MAXILLARY NEOPLASMS; MIDDLE AGED; PALATAL OBTURATORS; PHONETICS; SKIN TRANSPLANTATION; SPEECH; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SURGICAL FLAPS; TIME FACTORS; VOICE QUALITY;

EID: 79551667817     PISSN: 0305182X     EISSN: 13652842     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02139.x     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Desjardins RP. Obturator prosthesis design for acquired maxillary defects. J Prosthet Dent. 1978;39:424-435.
2. Beumer J, Curtis TA, Marunick MT. Maxillofacial rehabilitation: Prosthodontic and surgical considerations. St. Louis: Elsevier; 1996: 225-284.
3. Aramany MA, Drane JB. Effect of nasal extension sections on the voice quality of acquired cleft palate patients. J Prosthet Dent. 1972;27:194-202.
4. Zarb GA. The maxillary resection and its prosthetic replacement. J Prosthet Dent. 1967;18:268-281.
5. Oki M, Iida T, Mukohyama H, Tomizuka K, Takato T, Taniguchi H. The vibratory characteristics of obturators with different bulb height and form designs. J Oral Rehabil. 2006;33:43-51.
6. Brown KE. Peripheral consideration in improving obturator retention. J Prosthet Dent. 1968;20:176-181.
7. Adisman K. Removable partial dentures for jaw defects of the maxilla and mandible. Dent Clin North Am. 1962;849-870.
8. Kobayashi M, Oki M, Ozawa S, Inoue T, Mukohyama H, Takato T et al. Vibration analysis of obturator prostheses with different bulb height designs. J Med Dent Sci. 2002;49:121-128.
9. Kipfmueller LJ, Lang BR. Presurgical maxillary prosthesis: an analysis of speech intelligibility. J Prosthet Dent. 1972;28:620-625.
10. Sullivan M, Gaebler C, Beukelman D, Mahanna G, Marshall J, Lydiatt D et al. Impact of palatal prosthodontic intervention on communication performance of patients' maxillectomy defects: a multilevel outcome study. Head Neck. 2002;24:530-538.
11. Tobey EA, Lincks J. Acoustic analyses of speech changes after maxillectomy and prosthodontic management. J Prosthet Dent. 1989;62:449-455.
12. Umino S, Masuda G, Ono S, Fujita K. Speech intelligibility following maxillectomy with and without a prosthesis: an analysis of 54 cases. J Oral Rehabil. 1998;25:153-158.
13. Sumita YI, Ozawa S, Mukohyama H, Ueno T, Ohyama T, Taniguchi H. Digital acoustic analysis of five vowels in maxillectomy patients. J Oral Rehabil. 2002;29:649-656.
14. Dalston RM, Warren DW. Comparison of Tonar II, pressure-flow, and listener judgments of hypernasality in the assessment of velopharyngeal function. Cleft Palate J. 1986;23:108-115.
15. Watterson T, Lewis KE, Deutsch C. Nasalance and nasality in low pressure an dhigh pressure speech. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1998;35:293-298.
16. Bradlow AR, Torretta GM, Posoni DB. Intelligibility of normal speech. I. Global and fine-rained acoustic-phonetic talker characteristics. Speech Commun. 1996;20:255-272.
17. Peterson G, Barney H. Control methods used in a study of the vowels. J Acoust Soc Am. 1952;24:175-184.
18. Liu HM, Tsao FM, Kuhl PK. The effect of reduced vowel working space on speech intelligibility in Mandarin-speaking young adults with cerebral palsy. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005;117:3879-3889.
19. Raphael LJ, Borden GJ, Harris KS. Speech Science Primer: physiology, acoustic, and perception of speech, 5th edn. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007:105-130.
20. Turner GS, Tjaden K, Weismer G. The influence of speaking rate on vowel space and speech intelligibility for individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. J Speech Hear Res. 1995;38:1001-1013.
21. Weismer G, Laures JS, Jeng JY, Kent RD, Kent JF. Effect of speaking rate manipulations on acoustic and perceptual aspects of the dysarthria in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2000;52:201-219.
22. Aramany MA. Basic priciples of obturator design for partially edentulous patients. Part I: classification. J Prosthet Dent. 1978;40:554-557.
23. Sweeney T, Sell D. Relationship between perceptual ratings of nasality and nasometry in children/adolescents with cleft palate and/or velopharyngeal dysfunction. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2008;43:265-282.
24. Lewis KE, Watterson T, Quint T. The effect of vowels on nasalance scores. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2000;37:584-589.
25. Watterson T, Hinton J, McFarlane S. Novel stimuli for obtaining nasalance measures from Young Children. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1996;33:67-73.
26. Watterson T, Leweis K, Foley-Homan N. Effect of stimulus length on nassalance scores. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1999;36:243-247.
27. Ladefoged P. A course in phoneticsm, 5th edn. Boston: Thomson, Wadsworth; 2006: 211-236.
28. Eckardt A, Teltzrow T, Schulze A, Hoppe M, Kuettner C. Nasalance in patients with maxillary defects - Reconstruction versus obturation. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2007;35:241-245.
29. Rieger JM, Wolfaardt JF, Jha N, Seikaly H. Maxillary obturators: the relationship between patient satisfaction and speech outcome. Head Neck. 2003;25:895-903.
30. Yoshida H, Michi K, Oshawa T. Prosthetic treatment for speech disorders due to surgically acquired maxillary defects. J Oral Rehabil. 1990;17:565-571.