Functional dysphonia: A role for psychologists?

A Comparison of Voice and Psychotherapeutic Treatments for Adults With Functional Voice Disorders: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of traditional voice therapy and cognitive therapy on the voice and client-wellbeing outcomes in adults with functional voice disorders (FVD).

METHODS

A systematic review of English articles was conducted using Medline (Ovid), Embase (Elsevier), CINAHL (Ebsco), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsychInfo (Ebsco) and Speechbite from inception to current date. Additional studies were identified through bibliographies and authors were contacted when further information was required from an article. All study designs were included with pretest/posttest outcome measures related to voice. Independent extraction of studies was completed by three authors using predefined data fields and quality assessment tools.

RESULTS

Outcomes of 23 studies (2 RCTs and 21 cohort or case studies) are summarised using a narrative style due to heterogeneity of interventions and outcome scales used. Overall research quality of included studies was low, with many cohort and case studies lacking controls, blinding and robust outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

There are some benefits to pairing cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) with traditional voice therapy for FVD including improved voice quality, psychosocial wellbeing and prevention of relapse. It is feasible to train speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in CBT-enhanced voice therapy. Further high-quality research is needed, however, to guide the clinical implementation of CBT for the management of FVD.

Clinical Psychology and Voice Disorders: A Meta-Analytic Review of Studies Assessing Psychological Characteristics Across Individuals With and Without Voice Disorders

OBJECTIVES

Clinical voice disorders are heterogenous conditions capturing problems with voice production and control. Psychological conceptualizations of voice disorders posit that mood, anxiety, and personality characteristics contribute to the development and maintenance of voice symptoms. This review brings together research comparing these psychological characteristics across groups with and without voice disorders, with the aim of profiling group differences.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, Ovid (PsycInfo, MEDLINE, Embase), and Web of Science databases was conducted, with studies required to assess psychological characteristics between samples with and without voice disorders. Relative study quality and risk of bias were formally evaluated, synthesizing results via meta-analysis (estimating standardized mean difference; SMD) and narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies (N = 4740) were reviewed. Marked psychological differences were observed between case-control groups, including significantly higher self-reported features of depression (SMD = 0.50), state anxiety (SMD = 0.58), trait anxiety (SMD = 0.52), health anxiety (SMD = 0.57), and neuroticism (SMD = 0.47) in voice disorder groups. However, less consistent patterns of difference were observed between voice disorder types, including minimal quantitative differences between functional and organic diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings underline and formulate the psychological features associated with experiencing a voice disorder, indicating individuals with voice disorders present with considerable psychological needs that may benefit from clinical psychology input.

The dysphonic voice heard by me, you and it: differential associations with personality and psychological distress

Voice production is subject to and indicative of psychological status. The precise relationships of voice disorders and psychological variables remain unclear. We compared the correlations of self-reported and more objective measures of voice quality in dysphonic patients with personality, coping, affect and somatization. Two hundred and four subjects participating in a randomized, controlled trial of speech therapy underwent self-report, observer rating and computer acoustic analysis of voice quality. These three indices of voice quality were compared with regard to their correlations with individual differences in neuroticism, alexithymia, negative emotion coping, anxiety, depression, neurotic symptoms, medically unexplained symptoms and quality of life. Significant correlations were observed between self-reported voice problems and all of the personality/coping and clinical psychological distress measures. People who reported more voice problems had: higher neuroticism and alexithymia; a tendency to use emotion-oriented coping; more psychological distress; poorer quality of life; and more past medically unexplained symptoms. Expert voice rating correlated weakly with neurotic disturbance, quality of life and previous medically unexplained symptoms. Objective voice assessment (amplitude perturbation) showed no significant associations with any psychological measure. The strongest associations of psychological variables and voice measures are with self-report measures. This suggests that it is in part the patients' perception of their own voice quality which accounts for the association of voice production and psychological factors in subjects presenting to voice clinics.

The quality of life impact of dysphonia

Dysphonia can affect social life and employment, but formal studies of its general health impact are lacking. The aims of this study were (i) to compare self-rated general health status as measured by the SF-36 in a large cohort of dysphonic patients with those from normative groups; and (ii) to examine the differential impact of dysphonia on the various health status domains. The 163 dysphonic voice clinic attendees (38 men, 125 women) were drawn from recruits to a prospective trial of speech therapy efficacy. The Short-Form 36 (SF-36) scores were compared with published data on 744 age-matched healthy controls. Patients with dysphonia had significantly poorer self-reported health than the controls on all eight SF-36 subscales (limitation of physical activity P < 0.05; other seven, all P < 0.001, Student's t-test). We thus conclude that dysphonia in patients without obvious laryngeal disease has an adverse impact on all health status subscales as measured by the SF-36. The study provides further evidence for the inclusion quality of life measures in otolaryngology baseline and outcome assessments.

Is an organic/functional distinction psychologically meaningful in patients with dysphonia?

Dysphonia (hoarseness) is a common clinical condition and, if persistent, patients are referred to otolaryngology clinics for clinical examination. During the examination, a clinical distinction is often made among three types of patients: (1) those with a clear organic basis for dysphonia (cancer, vocal cord palsy): (2) those with some degree of organic pathology; and (3) those with an apparently functional etiology. Functional patients are often characterized as having a psychogenic disorder. This study assessed the psychological validity of the functional category in 204 out-patients (aged 17 to 87 years) with persistent hoarseness of types (2) and (3). Following clinical examination, a consultant otolaryngologist categorized patients as having functional or organic etiology. Subjects were then compared on measures of personality and psychological distress. Dysphonic subjects showed marked psychological distress compared with norms, and reported significantly more previous psychosomatic symptoms than norms, but there were no differences in personality or psychological distress between organic and functional subgroups of dysphonics.