Objective This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on treating patients who present with dysphonia, which is characterized by altered vocal quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication and/or quality of life. Dysphonia affects nearly one-third of the population at some point in its life. This guideline applies to all age groups evaluated in a setting where dysphonia would be identified or managed. It is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and treat patients with dysphonia. Purpose The primary purpose of this guideline is to improve the quality of care for patients with dysphonia, based on current best evidence. Expert consensus to fill evidence gaps, when used, is explicitly stated and supported with a detailed evidence profile for transparency. Specific objectives of the guideline are to reduce inappropriate variations in care, produce optimal health outcomes, and minimize harm. For this guideline update, the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation selected a panel representing the fields of advanced practice nursing, bronchoesophagology, consumer advocacy, family medicine, geriatric medicine, internal medicine, laryngology, neurology, otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, pediatrics, professional voice, pulmonology, and speech-language pathology. Action Statements The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following key action statements (KASs): (1) Clinicians should assess the patient with dysphonia by history and physical examination to identify factors where expedited laryngeal evaluation is indicated. These include, but are not limited to, recent surgical procedures involving the head, neck, or chest; recent endotracheal intubation; presence of concomitant neck mass; respiratory distress or stridor; history of tobacco abuse; and whether the patient is a professional voice user. (2) Clinicians should advocate voice therapy for patients with dysphonia from a cause amenable to voice therapy. The guideline update group made recommendations for the following KASs: (1) Clinicians should identify dysphonia in a patient with altered voice quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication or reduces quality of life (QOL). (2) Clinicians should assess the patient with dysphonia by history and physical examination for underlying causes of dysphonia and factors that modify management. (3) Clinicians should perform laryngoscopy, or refer to a clinician who can perform laryngoscopy, when dysphonia fails to resolve or improve within 4 weeks or irrespective of duration if a serious underlying cause is suspected. (4) Clinicians should perform diagnostic laryngoscopy, or refer to a clinician who can perform diagnostic laryngoscopy, before prescribing voice therapy and document/communicate the results to the speech-language pathologist (SLP). (5) Clinicians should advocate for surgery as a therapeutic option for patients with dysphonia with conditions amenable to surgical intervention, such as suspected malignancy, symptomatic benign vocal fold lesions that do not respond to conservative management, or glottic insufficiency. (6) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, botulinum toxin injections for the treatment of dysphonia caused by spasmodic dysphonia and other types of laryngeal dystonia. (7) Clinicians should inform patients with dysphonia about control/preventive measures. (8) Clinicians should document resolution, improvement or worsened symptoms of dysphonia, or change in QOL of patients with dysphonia after treatment or observation. The guideline update group made a strong recommendation against 1 action: (1) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe antibiotics to treat dysphonia. The guideline update group made recommendations against other actions: (1) Clinicians should not obtain computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for patients with a primary voice complaint prior to visualization of the larynx. (2) Clinicians should not prescribe antireflux medications to treat isolated dysphonia, based on symptoms alone attributed to suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), without visualization of the larynx. (3) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe corticosteroids for patients with dysphonia prior to visualization of the larynx. The policy level for the following recommendation about laryngoscopy at any time was an option: (1) Clinicians may perform diagnostic laryngoscopy at any time in a patient with dysphonia. Disclaimer This clinical practice guideline is not intended as an exhaustive source of guidance for managing dysphonia (hoarseness). Rather, it is designed to assist clinicians by providing an evidence-based framework for decision-making strategies. The guideline is not intended to replace clinical judgment or establish a protocol for all individuals with this condition, and it may not provide the only appropriate approach to diagnosing and managing this problem. Differences from Prior Guideline (1) Incorporation of new evidence profiles to include the role of patient preferences, confidence in the evidence, differences of opinion, quality improvement opportunities, and any exclusion to which the action statement does not apply (2) Inclusion of 3 new guidelines, 16 new systematic reviews, and 4 new randomized controlled trials (3) Inclusion of a consumer advocate on the guideline update group (4) Changes to 9 KASs from the original guideline (5) New KAS 3 (escalation of care) and KAS 13 (outcomes) (6) Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs for patients with dysphonia.

Objective This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on treating patients presenting with dysphonia, which is characterized by altered vocal quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication and/or quality of life. Dysphonia affects nearly one-third of the population at some point in its life. This guideline applies to all age groups evaluated in a setting where dysphonia would be identified or managed. It is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and treat patients with dysphonia. Purpose The primary purpose of this guideline is to improve the quality of care for patients with dysphonia, based on current best evidence. Expert consensus to fill evidence gaps, when used, is explicitly stated and supported with a detailed evidence profile for transparency. Specific objectives of the guideline are to reduce inappropriate variations in care, produce optimal health outcomes, and minimize harm. For this guideline update, the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation selected a panel representing the fields of advanced practice nursing, bronchoesophagology, consumer advocacy, family medicine, geriatric medicine, internal medicine, laryngology, neurology, otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, pediatrics, professional voice, pulmonology, and speech-language pathology. Action Statements The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following key action statements (KASs): (1) Clinicians should assess the patient with dysphonia by history and physical examination to identify factors where expedited laryngeal evaluation is indicated. These include but are not limited to recent surgical procedures involving the head, neck, or chest; recent endotracheal intubation; presence of concomitant neck mass; respiratory distress or stridor; history of tobacco abuse; and whether the patient is a professional voice user. (2) Clinicians should advocate voice therapy for patients with dysphonia from a cause amenable to voice therapy. The guideline update group made recommendations for the following KASs: (1) Clinicians should identify dysphonia in a patient with altered voice quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication or reduces quality of life (QOL). (2) Clinicians should assess the patient with dysphonia by history and physical examination for underlying causes of dysphonia and factors that modify management. (3) Clinicians should perform laryngoscopy, or refer to a clinician who can perform laryngoscopy, when dysphonia fails to resolve or improve within 4 weeks or irrespective of duration if a serious underlying cause is suspected. (4) Clinicians should perform diagnostic laryngoscopy, or refer to a clinician who can perform diagnostic laryngoscopy, before prescribing voice therapy and document/communicate the results to the speech-language pathologist (SLP). (5) Clinicians should advocate for surgery as a therapeutic option for patients with dysphonia with conditions amenable to surgical intervention, such as suspected malignancy, symptomatic benign vocal fold lesions that do not respond to conservative management, or glottic insufficiency. (6) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, botulinum toxin injections for the treatment of dysphonia caused by spasmodic dysphonia and other types of laryngeal dystonia. (7) Clinicians should inform patients with dysphonia about control/preventive measures. (8) Clinicians should document resolution, improvement or worsened symptoms of dysphonia, or change in QOL of patients with dysphonia after treatment or observation. The guideline update group made a strong recommendation against 1 action: (1) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe antibiotics to treat dysphonia. The guideline update group made recommendations against other actions: (1) Clinicians should not obtain computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for patients with a primary voice complaint prior to visualization of the larynx. (2) Clinicians should not prescribe antireflux medications to treat isolated dysphonia, based on symptoms alone attributed to suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), without visualization of the larynx. (3) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe corticosteroids in patients with dysphonia prior to visualization of the larynx. The policy level for the following recommendation about laryngoscopy at any time was an option: (1) Clinicians may perform diagnostic laryngoscopy at any time in a patient with dysphonia. Differences from Prior Guideline (1) Incorporating new evidence profiles to include the role of patient preferences, confidence in the evidence, differences of opinion, quality improvement opportunities, and any exclusion to which the action statement does not apply (2) Inclusion of 3 new guidelines, 16 new systematic reviews, and 4 new randomized controlled trials (3) Inclusion of a consumer advocate on the guideline update group (4) Changes to 9 KASs from the original guideline (5) New KAS 3 (escalation of care) and KAS 13 (outcomes) (6) Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs for patients with dysphonia.

This plain language summary for patients serves as an overview in explaining hoarseness (dysphonia). The summary applies to patients in all age groups and is based on the 2018 \"Clinical Practice Guideline: Hoarseness (Dysphonia) (Update).\" The evidence-based guideline includes research to support more effective identification and management of patients with hoarseness (dysphonia). The primary purpose of the guideline is to improve the quality of care for patients with hoarseness (dysphonia) based on current best evidence.

BACKGROUND: Existing evaluative instruments for dysphagia, odynophagia, and voice disturbance are cumbersome, focus pre-dominately on dysphagia, and often require administration by a certified Speech Pathologist. This study was conducted to utilize widely accepted instruments such as the American Speech and Hearing Association\'s National Outcomes Measurement System (NOMS) and VAS pain scales to validate a novel, patient-reported instrument that quantifies the severity of post-operative dysphagia, odynophagia, and voice disabilities (DOV).
METHODS: The DOV was developed and subjected to multiple rounds of face and content validation by representative patient cohorts and a panel of clinical experts. An established, prospective clinical registry was utilized to collect pre and post-operative VAS-swallow related pain and DOV measurements for subjects with recent anterior cervical procedures (n=25 content validation, n=20 criterion validation), or recent lumbar decompressions (n=33). NOMS evaluations were performed by a certified Speech Language Pathologist on the first post-operative day after minimally invasive anterior approaches to cervical reconstruction were performed in the criterion validation cohort.
RESULTS: Content validity: Subjects with a recent anterior cervical procedure reported a significant increase in post-operative dysphagia (pre-op: 0.13±0.35, post-op: 1.08±1.41, p=0.01), odynophagia (pre-op: 0.24±0.69, post-op: 0.84±0.90, p=0.001), and voice (pre-op: 0.10±0.41, post-op: 0.88±0.92, p=0.0004) disturbance. In contrast, subjects with a recent lumbar procedure did not demonstrate a significant increase in post-operative dysphagia, odynophagia, or voice disturbance (p>0.05).Criterion validity: Chi-squared contingency testing for independence between converted NOMS and DOV instrument scores accepted linkage between the two instruments for dysphagia X2(DF: 12, n=20, Expected: 21.03, Observed: 24.4, p: 0.02) and voice X2(DF: 6, n=20, Expected: 12.60, Observed: 21.28, p: 0.002) dimensions. Similarly, converted swallow related VAS and DOV odynophagia instruments demonstrated linkage X2(DF: 9, n=20, Expected: 16.92, Observed: 24.21, p: 0.004).Internal Reliability: Chronbach\'s alpha coefficient of reliability was 0.74 between all DOV survey dimensions.
CONCLUSIONS: The DOV survey is a valid patient-reported instrument to rapidly and reliably detect post-operative swallow and voice dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify risk factors for the incidence of perceived voice disorders in teachers, specifically related to the influence of common mental disorders.
METHODS: This is a longitudinal quantitative study conducted in municipal schools.
METHODS: We performed a data analysis of 469 teachers, reassessed 3 years after an initial study. The Voice Handicap Index was used to measure the impact of a probable voice problem with a cutoff value of 19 points. Mental disorder symptomatology was measured by the Self-Reporting Questionnaire (20 items), with a cutoff value of eight points. Bivariate analysis was conducted through Poisson regression to verify proportion differences in the occurrence of perceived voice disorders among the study\'s different categories of independent variables. The same technique of Poisson regression was used to assess risk factors for perceived voice disorder incidence in a specific hierarchic model.
RESULTS: The incidence of a perceived voice disorder was 17.1%. Teachers who lectured in fourth grade and below presented a risk of 20% less than those who lectured from the fifth grade up (P = 0.046). Teachers who reported taking a leave of absence because of their voice had a 32% more chance of a probable perceived voice disorder (P = 0.024). Teachers who presented a common mental disorder had twice the risk of perceived voice disorder (P > 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: This study concluded that teachers presented a higher risk of developing a perceived voice disorder when they have the following features: lectured from fifth grade up, have gone on leave because of their voice, and showed behavior indicative of common mental disorder.

To report on the prevalence of voice disturbances in the pediatric craniofacial population and to prove that the pediatric Voice Handicap Index (pVHI) is a useful questionnaire for this unique population.
Case series with chart review.
Tertiary care center.
Pediatric patients seen by a pediatric otolaryngologist in a craniofacial clinic.
Consecutive patients (N = 366) seen by a single pediatric otolaryngologist in a craniofacial clinic from July 2011 to September 2012 were included. Any patient specifically referred for airway problems or voice difficulties completed a pVHI questionnaire. Patients each underwent an evaluation including flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy and videostroboscopy. Voice disturbance was further characterized into dysphonia, hypernasality, or hyponasality.
Of all the patients evaluated, 280 (77%) were specifically referred for airway problems or voice disturbance. Of those referred, 39 (10.7%) were found to have an organic vocal fold pathology causing dysphonia, as seen on the videostroboscopic examination; 53.7% of these lesions were attributable to potential iatrogenic causes. Hypernasality and hyponasality were seen in 116 (31.7%) and 78 (21.3%) patients, respectively. The pVHI was 3.95, 26.3, 11.34, and 10.53 for those with no voice disturbance, dysphonia, hypernasality, and hyponasality, respectively.
Pediatric patients with craniofacial disorders have a higher prevalence of dysphonia than the general pediatric population. The majority of causes of dysphonia in these patients are possibly iatrogenic in origin. The pVHI serves as a useful questionnaire in this unique patient cohort to quantify the disability from not only dysphonia but also hypernasality and hyponasality.