Search

ABSTRACT Background Acoustic evaluation of speech is the least explored method of speech evaluation in patients with oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer. The purpose of this study was to explore acoustic parameters of speech and their correlation with questionnaire evaluation and perceptual evaluation in patients with oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer. Methods One hundred seventeen subjects (65 consecutive patients with oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer and 52 controls) participated in this study. Formant frequencies (by Linear Predictive Coding), Speech Handicap Index, and London Speech Evaluation scale were used for acoustic evaluation, questionnaire evaluation, and perceptual evaluation, respectively. Results Men showed significant elevation in second formant (F2) values for patients with oral cavity cancer and those who underwent surgery alone. Female patients with early T classification cancers and those who underwent surgery and chemoradiation showed significant reduction in the mean F2 values. Importantly, however, acoustic evaluation parameters did not correlate with either perceptual evaluation or questionnaire evaluation parameters, although there was moderate correlation between questionnaire evaluation and perceptual evaluation speech parameters. Conclusion Acoustic evaluation modalities have no clear role in the management of patients with oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: 670-676, 2016 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim was to explore the impact of important clinico-demographic factors on the post-treatment quality of life (QOL) in surgically treated oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients. 63 consecutive follow-up oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients treated primarily with surgery were recruited. 55 patients sent the completed questionnaires and finally included in this study. QOL and important sub-domains of the QOL were assessed. Mean QOL scores (SD) were computed, level of significance was set at P < 0.05. The mean composite QOL score and standard deviation (SD) for oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients were 76.6 (15.2) and 73.4 (13.9), respectively. Patients with higher T-stage (T3 and T4) and higher overall-stage (III and IV) had lower mean QOL scores as against early T (T1 and T2) and overall early-stage (I and II); mean scores (SD) 64.3 (13.6) and 72.3 (13.8), and 76.6 (13.6) and 81.7 (14.1), respectively. Younger patients had lower mean scores (SD) than older patients; mean QOL scores (SD) 69.7 (14.0) and 79.6 (SD), respectively. Patients with reconstruction had lower mean QOL scores as compared to those without reconstruction; mean scores (SD) 67.6 (16.0) and 77.4 (12.5), respectively. In conclusion, tumor-stage, overall-stage, age of patients, and reconstruction had a significant direct effect on the post-treatment QOL of oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Posttreatment speech problems are seen in nearly half of patients with head and neck cancer. Although there are many voice-specific scales, surprisingly there is no speech-specific questionnaire for English-speaking patients with head and neck cancer. The aim of this study was to validate the Speech Handicap Index (SHI) as the first speech-specific questionnaire in the English language. Method. In all, 55 consecutive patients in follow-up for oral and oropharyngeal cancer completed the SHI and University of Washington Quality of Life Questionnaire (UWQOL V.04). Thirty-two patients completed both questionnaires again 4 weeks later to address test-retest reliability. Results. Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct validity, and group validity of the SHI were found to be highly significant (p < .01) using Cronbach's alpha, Spearman's correlation coefficient (r), and Mann-Whitney U tests. Conclusions. The SHI is a precise, highly reliable, and valid speech assessment tool for patients with head and neck cancer. Further dedicated studies using the SHI in patients with head and neck cancer would be useful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]