This study aimed to develop a valid and reliable bilingual version of the Consensus Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice (CAPE-V) for the auditory-perceptual evaluation of voice in Catalan and Spanish speakers.
The development of this CAPE-V adaptation included Delphi methodology with 20 voice and speech experts reaching consensus on the optimal adapted terminology of the perceptual vocal attributes, considering also input from the original instrument authors. The adaptation and validation of vocal tasks followed a sequential validation procedure, with input from phoneticians and speech-language pathologists. Following pilot testing with a large sample of speech-language pathology students, a refined adapted version was empirically tested for validity and reliability. Concurrent validity was assessed by comparing the adapted CAPE-V with the reference Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, Strain scale. Construct validity was assessed through convergent and discriminant validity analysis. Intrarater and interrater reliability were assessed via intraclass correlation coefficient calculations. User experience was evaluated through a questionnaire. Scale properties were validated using a confusion matrix, and cutoff values were calculated to achieve the optimal balance between sensitivity and specificity.
Through a formalized consensus process, optimal Catalan/Spanish terminology was determined for the perceptual attributes of voice present in the CAPE-V. An adapted protocol of tasks was obtained that preserves the objectives of the original instrument and the relevance of the phonetic criteria in the target languages. The results demonstrated concurrent validity, construct validity, and intrarater reliability. Interrater reliability was found to depend on the extent to which evaluators shared their internal standards. The raters identified CAPE-V as an effective and preferred instrument.
An adapted, validated version of the CAPE-V is made available to clinical professionals for the evaluation of voice in Catalan and Spanish speakers.

The Korean Society of Laryngology, Phoniatrics and Logopedics created a task force to establish clinical practice guidelines for the use of botulinum toxin (BT) in otolaryngology. We selected 10 disease categories: spasmodic dysphonia, essential vocal tremor, vocal fold granuloma, bilateral vocal fold paralysis, Frey\'s syndrome, sialocele, sialorrhea, cricopharyngeal dysfunction, chronic sialadenitis, and first bite syndrome. To retrieve all relevant papers, we searched the CORE databases with predefined search strategies, including Medline (PubMed), Embase, the Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed. The committee reported 13 final recommendations with detailed evidence profiles. The guidelines are primarily aimed at all clinicians applying BT to the head and neck area. In addition, the guidelines aim to promote an improved understanding of the safe and effective use of BT by policymakers and counselors, as well as in patients scheduled to receive BT injections.

BACKGROUND: To update the European guidelines for the assessment of voice quality (VQ) in clinical practice.
METHODS: Nineteen laryngologists-phoniatricians of the European Laryngological Society (ELS) and the Union of the European Phoniatricians (UEP) participated to a modified Delphi process to propose statements about subjective and objective VQ assessments. Two anonymized voting rounds determined a consensus statement to be acceptable when 80% of experts agreed with a rating of at least 3/4. The statements with ≥ 3/4 score by 60-80% of experts were improved and resubmitted to voting until they were validated or rejected.
RESULTS: Of the 90 initial statements, 51 were validated after two voting rounds. A multidimensional set of minimal VQ evaluations was proposed and included: baseline VQ anamnesis (e.g., allergy, medical and surgical history, medication, addiction, singing practice, job, and posture), videolaryngostroboscopy (mucosal wave symmetry, amplitude, morphology, and movements), patient-reported VQ assessment (30- or 10-voice handicap index), perception (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, and Strain), aerodynamics (maximum phonation time), acoustics (Mean F0, Jitter, Shimmer, and noise-to-harmonic ratio), and clinical instruments associated with voice comorbidities (reflux symptom score, reflux sign assessment, eating-assessment tool-10, and dysphagia handicap index). For perception, aerodynamics and acoustics, experts provided guidelines for the methods of measurement. Some additional VQ evaluations are proposed for voice professionals or patients with some laryngeal diseases.
CONCLUSIONS: The ELS-UEP consensus for VQ assessment provides clinical statements for the baseline and pre- to post-treatment evaluations of VQ and to improve collaborative research by adopting common and validated VQ evaluation approach.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the results of the Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI) and Consensus Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice (CAPE-V) between patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and healthy subjects, as well as to investigate the correlation between DSI and CAPE-V.
METHODS: Cross-sectional survey.
METHODS: Eighty subjects, 40 COVID-19 patients (with a mean age of 41.2± 5.41) and 40 healthy subjects (with a mean age of 44.50± 3.50) participated in this study. Assessments included the DSI for aerodynamic-acoustic measurement and the Persian version of Consensus Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice (CAPE-V) for evaluating auditory-perceptual voice quality. Data were analyzed by means of the independent t-test and Pearson correlation at the 5% significance level.
RESULTS: The results showed COVID-19 patients got significantly lower score in DSI compared to healthy subjects (P < 0.05). Moreover, the patients with COVID-19 had higher scores in all categories of voice production (severity, roughness, loudness, pitch, strain and breathiness) than the healthy group (P < 0.05). Comparing the result of the two voice assessments in each group revealed that there was a greater negative significant correlation in the diseased group (r p: -0.68, P: 0.001) than in the healthy group (r p: -0.37,P: 0.049).
CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients experience deviations in the voice quality and acoustic-aerodynamic features of their voice. Also, the results of this study showed the patient group had higher perceptual dysphonia and lower voice quality compared to the healthy group. Further studies are recommended to determine the relationship between objective and subjective voice evaluation in patients with COVID-19 after recovery.

The Consensus Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice (CAPE-V) is a standardized instrument used in voice assessment to assess voice quality. It has been translated and culturally adapted in several languages. This study aimed at developing and validating a Tamil version of CAPE-V through auditory perceptual evaluation of remotely recorded voice samples.
The Tamil version was adapted with permission from the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association to match the rationale in English CAPE-V. The sentences were constructed by the first author and validated for content by two panels of experts. Forty-five participants (15 cases and 30 controls) were included in the study. Data recording was conducted online (Zoom Video Communications, Inc., app) for all samples. Three raters participated in the auditory evaluation and scored all samples using Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, and Strain (GRBAS) scale followed by CAPE-V with a week gap in between. Twenty percent of samples were repeated to assess intrarater reliability. The intrarater and interrater reliability measures for Tamil CAPE-V were established using intraclass coefficients (ICCs). To ensure construct validity, group differences were determined between the cases and controls. The concurrent validity was established by correlating Tamil CAPE-V with the GRBAS scale.
The intrarater reliability for Tamil CAPE-V ranged from moderate to excellent (ICC: .610-.998). The Tamil CAPE-V obtained moderate to good interrater reliability for all parameters (ICC: .525-.790) except pitch (ICC: .405). The differences between the cases and controls were statistically significant (p < .01). The correlation between CAPE-V and GRBAS was strong for overall severity, breathiness, and strain (r s = .725-.861) and moderate for roughness (r s = .678).
The Tamil CAPE-V is a reliable and valid tool for auditory perceptual evaluation in Tamil-speaking populations.
https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.21513885.

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a multisystem disease that often requires otolaryngology care. Individuals with CF commonly have chronic rhinosinusitis but also present with hearing loss and dysphonia. Given these manifestations of CF, otolaryngologists are frequently involved in the care of patients with CF; however, there is limited consensus on optimal management of sinonasal, otologic, and laryngologic symptoms.
The Cystic Fibrosis Foundation convened a multidisciplinary team of otolaryngologists, pulmonologists, audiologists, pharmacists, a social worker, a nurse coordinator, a respiratory therapist, two adults with CF, and a caregiver of a child with CF to develop consensus recommendations. Workgroups developed draft recommendation statements based on a systematic literature review, and a ≥80% consensus was required for acceptance of each recommendation statement.
The committee voted on 25 statements. Eleven statements were adopted recommending a treatment or intervention, while five statements were formulated recommending against a specific treatment or intervention. The committee recommended eight statements as an option for select patients in certain circumstances, and one statement did not reach consensus.
These multidisciplinary consensus recommendations will help providers navigate decisions related to otolaryngology consultation, medical and surgical management of CF-CRS, hearing, and voice in individuals with CF. A collaborative and multidisciplinary approach is advocated to best care for our patients with CF. Future clinical research is needed utilizing standardized, validated outcomes with comprehensive reporting of patient outcome, effects of modulator therapies, and genetic characteristics to help continue to advance care, decrease morbidity, and improve the quality of life for individuals with CF.

Voice change is a common complaint after thyroid surgery and has significant impacts on quality of life. The Korean Society of Laryngology, Phoniatrics, and Logopedics set up a task force team to establish guideline recommendations on education, care, and management related to thyroid surgery. The guideline recommendations include preoperative voice education, management of anticipated voice change during surgery, and comprehensive voice care after thyroid surgery, including in-depth information and up-to-date knowledge based on validated literature. The committee constructed 14 key questions (KQ) in three categories: preoperative (KQ1-2), intraoperative (KQ 3-8), and postoperative (KQ 9-14) management and developed 18 evidence-based recommendations. The Delphi survey reached an agreement on each recommendation. Detailed evidence profiles are presented for each recommendation. The level of evidence for each recommendation is classified into high, moderate, and low-quality. The recommendation\'s strengths are adjusted to consider the level of evidence resulting in the recommendation and are divided into strong and weak. The guidelines are primarily targeted toward physicians who treat thyroid surgery patients and speech-language pathologists participating in patient care. These guidelines will also help primary care physicians, nurses, healthcare policymakers, and patients improve their understanding of voice changes and voice care after thyroid surgery.

Aim The purpose of this study was to develop and assess the reliability of a Hindi version of the Consensus Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice (CAPE-V). Reliability was assessed by comparing Hindi CAPE-V ratings with English CAPE-V ratings and by the Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia and Strain (GRBAS) scale. Method Hindi sentences were created to match the phonemic load of the corresponding English CAPE-V sentences. The Hindi sentences were adapted for linguistic content. The original English and adapted Hindi CAPE-V and GRBAS were completed for 33 bilingual individuals with normal voice quality. Additionally, the Hindi CAPE-V and GRBAS were completed for 13 Hindi speakers with disordered voice quality. The agreement of CAPE-V ratings was assessed between language versions, GRBAS ratings, and two rater pairs (three raters in total). Pearson product-moment correlation was completed for all comparisons. Results A strong correlation (r > .8, p < .01) was found between the Hindi CAPE-V scores and the English CAPE-V scores for most variables in normal voice participants. A weak correlation was found for the variable of strain (r < .2, p = .400) in the normative group. A strong correlation (r > .6, p < .01) was found between the overall severity/grade, roughness, and breathiness scores in the GRBAS scale and the CAPE-V scale in normal and disordered voice samples. Significant interrater reliability (r > .75) was present in overall severity and breathiness. Conclusions The Hindi version of the CAPE-V demonstrates good interrater reliability and concurrent validity with the English CAPE-V and the GRBAS. The Hindi CAPE-V can be used for the auditory-perceptual voice assessment of Hindi speakers.

UNASSIGNED: To determine if a Canadian voice center is meeting the recommended time to laryngoscopy for hoarseness per the clinical practice guideline of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.
UNASSIGNED: Retrospective chart audit.
UNASSIGNED: Tertiary referral Canadian voice center.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 149 adult patients presenting with hoarseness over 6 months were included. Primary outcome measures were the time from onset of symptoms to laryngoscopy and the time from referral to laryngoscopy. Secondary outcome measures included patient- and disease-modifying factors, diagnosis, and clinical management. Analysis was performed to determine what factors were associated with meeting the guideline.
UNASSIGNED: Patients were evaluated by the laryngologist after 21.9 ± 37.6 months (mean ± SD) of symptoms. One-third (34.2%) of patients were seen within 3 months; 10.7% were seen within 4 weeks. Logistic regression showed that patients with neurologic symptoms (odds ratio, 4.04; 95% CI, 1.31-12.43; P = .015) and endotracheal intubation (odds ratio, 5.94; 95% CI, 2.21-15.95; P < .001) were associated with being seen within 3 months. Patients who had recent intubation (odds ratio, 6.04; 95% CI, 1.99-18.34; P = .002) were associated with being seen within 4 weeks.
UNASSIGNED: It is an ongoing challenge for our Canadian voice center to meet the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery\'s clinical practice guideline for recommended time to laryngoscopy. Patients with more severe pathologies were consistently triaged more urgently. It is debatable whether this 4-week time recommendation is generalizable to a socialized health care system.

Procedures putting healthcare workers in close contact with the airway are particularly at risk of contamination by the SARS-Cov-2 virus, especially when exposed to sputum, coughing, or a tracheostomy. In the current pandemic phase, all patients should be considered as potentially infected. Thus, the level of precaution recommended for the caregivers depends more on the type of procedure than on the patient\'s proved or suspected COVID-19 status. Procedures that are particularly at high risk of contamination are clinical and flexible endoscopic pharyngo-laryngological evaluation, and probably also video fluoroscopic swallowing exams. Voice rehabilitation should not be considered urgent at this time. Therefore, recommendations presented here mainly concern the management of swallowing disorders, which can sometimes be dangerous for the patient, and recent dysphonia. In cases where they are considered possible and useful, teleconsultations should be preferred to face-to-face assessments or rehabilitation sessions. The latter must be maintained only in few selected situations, after team discussions or in accordance with the guidelines provided by health authorities.