目的:声乐疲劳是一种重要的主诉,可能表明有语音障碍或其风险。需要一种可靠的工具来检测和量化发声疲劳并区分发音不良和发声健康的说话者。已发现声乐疲劳指数(VFI)问卷在不同语言的使用者中有效且可靠。这项研究旨在为芬兰语使用者验证它。
方法:实验比较研究。
方法:根据WHO的建议,将VFI问卷从英语翻译成芬兰语。接下来,它经过了验证程序。总的来说,160名芬兰语发言者自愿参加了这项研究。一百八名是语音患者(83名男性,25名女性)和52名是声音健康的对照(37名女性,15名男性)。作为比较,完成了语音障碍指数(VHI)问卷,并记录了语音样本,以进行语音质量指数(AVQI03.01FIN)分析.
结果:第一次和第二次完成VFI(F)问卷的结果密切相关(Spearman的rho0.901,P=0.01)。对VFI(F)个体问题的回答也密切相关,表现出较高的内部一致性。VFI的因素1(语音疲劳和避免使用语音)与VHI密切相关,另外两个因素(与发声和症状改善相关的身体不适)与VHI中度相关。VFI(F)的因子之一与AVQI03.01FIN及其子参数中度相关,CPPS,HNR,和微光。VFI(F)表现出良好的结构效度,在分界点13.5区分语音患者和对照组,灵敏度为0.963,特异性为0.885。所有因素的判别能力都很强:F1AROC=0.985,F2AROC=0.864,F3AROC=0.821。
结论:VFI(F)与VHI和AVQI01.01FIN相关,是检测芬兰语使用者声带疲劳的有效可靠工具。
OBJECTIVE: Vocal fatigue is an important complaint that may indicate a voice disorder or a risk thereof. There is a need for a reliable tool to detect and quantify vocal fatigue and distinguish dysphonic and vocally healthy speakers. The Vocal Fatigue Index (VFI) questionnaire has been found valid and reliable among speakers of different languages. This study aims to validate it for speakers of Finnish.
METHODS: Experimental comparative study.
METHODS: The VFI questionnaire was translated from English to Finnish according to the WHO recommendations. Next, it was subjected to the validation procedure. In total, 160 Finnish speakers volunteered to participate in the study. Hundred-and-eight were voice patients (83 males, 25 females) and 52 were vocally healthy controls (37 females, 15 males). As a comparison, the Voice Handicap Index (
VHI) questionnaire was completed and voice samples were recorded to enable Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI03.01FIN) analysis.
RESULTS: Results from the first and second completions of the VFI(F) questionnaire correlated strongly (Spearman\'s rho 0.901, P = 0.01). Answers to the individual questions the VFI(F) also correlated strongly, showing high internal consistency. Factor 1 (Tiredness of voice and avoidance of voice use) of the VFI correlated strongly with the
VHI, and the two other factors (Physical discomfort associated with voicing and Improvement of symptoms) correlated moderately with the
VHI. Factor one of the VFI(F) correlated moderately with AVQI03.01FIN and its sub-parameters, CPPS, HNR, and shimmer. The VFI(F) showed good construct validity, differentiating voice patients and controls at cut-off 13.5, with sensitivity of 0.963 and specificity of 0.885. Discriminatory power was strong for all factors: F1 AROC = 0.985, F2 AROC = 0.864, and F3 AROC = 0.821.
CONCLUSIONS: The VFI(F) correlates with the
VHI and with AVQI01.01FIN and it is a valid and reliable tool for detecting vocal fatigue in Finnish speakers.