Abstract
Abstract The current lack of knowledge on the effects of transcutaneous electrical stimulation-supported voice therapy (TESVT) on voice production, coupled with increasing anecdotal reports of TESVT use with voice disorders, prompted this research. The aim of this study was to compare the therapeutic value of conventional voice therapy (CVT) and TESVT on voice outcome in patients with unilateral vocal fold paralysis. The study was conducted on randomly selected 29 patients with unilateral vocal fold paralysis who were candidates for voice therapy attending to the Unit of Phoniatrics, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alexandria. The patients were divided into two groups: group I, which included 14 patients who were assigned to CVT, and group II, which included 15 patients who were assigned to TESVT. Each patient was subjected to the following procedures before and after therapy to document glottis closure and voice quality changes: auditory perceptual assessment using the GRBAS scale, the Voice Problem Self-assessment Scale, videostroboscopic examination, and acoustic and aerodynamic analysis of a sample of phonation in addition to electroglottography. TESVT was applied for all participants. Statistically significant changes have been obtained for all measurers. No significant statistical difference was found between CVT and TESVT in patients with vocal fold immobility except for frequency perturbation and some electroglottographic parameters. Transcutaneous electrical stimulation-supported voice therapy is as effective as CVT in improving voice parameters in cases of unilateral vocal fold immobility. Further research is warranted with a larger number of patients to assess the efficacy of electrical stimulation-supported voice therapy in cases of vocal fold immobility and to determine selective criteria for this TESVT approach.
Highlights
The current lack of knowledge on the effects of transcutaneous electrical stimulation-supported voice therapy (TESVT) on voice production, coupled with increasing anecdotal reports of TESVT use with voice disorders, prompted this research
No significant statistical difference was found between conventional voice therapy (CVT) and TESVT in patients with vocal fold immobility except for frequency perturbation and some electroglottographic parameters
Transcutaneous electrical stimulation-supported voice therapy is as effective as CVT in improving voice parameters in cases of unilateral vocal fold immobility
Summary
The current lack of knowledge on the effects of transcutaneous electrical stimulation-supported voice therapy (TESVT) on voice production, coupled with increasing anecdotal reports of TESVT use with voice disorders, prompted this research. The goal of electrical stimulation-supported voice therapy is, on the one hand, to achieve, with individually adapted stimulation current strength during intended phonation, a return of nerve. The principle idea of electrical stimulation therapy for regeneration and protection is that only damaged muscles are stimulated − that is, damaged muscles are forced to contract with a current pulse. If voice therapy is combined with electrostimulation therapy, all three aspects − namely, regeneration, protection, and compensation − will be addressed [5]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
