Correlation of the Voice Handicap Index (VHI) and the Voice-Related Quality of Life Measure (V-RQOL)

The purpose of this study was to investigate the correlation between the Voice Handicap Index (VHI) and the Voice-Related Quality of Life Measure (V-RQOL), and to test conversion of scores between the two instruments. Understanding the relationship between instruments will facilitate comparison of voice outcome studies using different measures. A retrospective medical chart review of 140 consecutive patients with a chief complaint related to their voice presenting for speech pathology voice evaluation following laryngology evaluation and diagnosis was adopted. Each patient who filled out the VHI and V-RQOL within a 2-week period with no intervening treatment was included in the study. Correlation analysis for total scores was performed for the patients meeting inclusion criteria (n=132). Correlations were also performed as a function of diagnosis. Calculated VHI score based on measured V-RQOL score was compared to measured VHI score. Pearson correlation between scores on the VHI and V-RQOL was -0.82. There was no significant difference between the mean measured and mean calculated VHI scores. For individual scores, however, regression analysis did reveal a significant difference between calculated and measured VHI. The VHI and V-RQOL are highly correlated; however, this study suggests that the two instruments are not interchangeable for individuals.     

An investigation of the Voice Handicap Index with Speakers of Portuguese: Preliminary data

Although the Voice Handicap Index (VHI) has been recognized as a useful tool for quantifying American English speakers' perceived consequences of voice disorder, it has not yet been widely applied in the clinic to study dysphonic patient populations, or tested with a normally speaking population. The purpose of this investigation was to obtain information about the VHI in a group of Portuguese speakers with voice complaints compared with an age- and gender-matched group of speakers without voice complaints. The results demonstrate that speakers with voice complaints have overall VHI total scores significantly higher than speakers without voice complaints (p < 0.001). This is also true for all VHI subscores in the emotional (p < 0.001), functional (p < 0.05), and physical (p < 0.001) domains. So, the assumption that a group with voice complaints has higher voice handicap impact than the matched control comparison group is justified for Portuguese speakers.     

The Voice Handicap Index: Correlation Between Subjective Patient Response and Quantitative Assessment of Voice

The aim of this prospective study is to elucidate the relationship between the Voice Handicap Index (VHI) and several voice laboratory measurements in the network of the multidimensional voice assessment. Fifty-eight patients were included. Each patient replies to the questionnaire and performs a voice assessment during the same time. The following parameters were measured: minimum frequency, maximum frequency, range, minimum intensity, subglottic pressure, mean flow, maximum phonation time, jitter, and dysphonia severity index. Regarding the relationship with the scores of the VHI, poor correlations with the minimal frequency for all the scores except the emotional one (total and subscales) and with the range for only the physical one are found. Seventeen questions correlate with the voice laboratory measurements we performed, with a decreased distribution between physical, functional, and emotional subscales. We observe that acoustic parameter is correlated with the emotional subscale, the parameters of the profile range are more often involved in the emotional subscale, as is the minimal frequency, but never with the physical subscale, and all the subscales are interesting despite the smaller number of differences with the emotional one. The VHI and the laboratory measurements give independent informations in practice.     

Validation of the Voice Handicap Index Using Rasch Analysis

BACKGROUND: The Voice Handicap Index is a tool for measuring the psychosocial consequences of voice disorders and consists of three dimensions. Previous psychometric evaluation of the VHI focused on the classic evaluation of reliability and validity, which is sample dependent. The authors used Rasch analysis to re-examine the dimensionality of the VHI and to produce item and scale statistics that are less sample dependent. In addition, they provide estimates of VHI item and person severities that are reported on the same logit unit scale, allowing a more straightforward interpretation of a VHI test score. PATIENTS: Dysphonic patients (N = 530), who were referred for phoniatric examination, filled out the VHI. RESULTS: Rasch analysis revealed two truly uni-dimensional constructs: the 20-item psychosocial scale and the 9-item physical-functional scale. Logit item severity measures ranged from -2.1 to +2.7. Person severity scores ranged from -4.4 to + 4.4 logits. The internal consistency of the reduced scales was similar to that of the original total VHI (0.95 and 0.84). The VHI consisted of two uni-dimensional constructs. Raw test scores can be transformed into logit unit severity measures, making the VHI more suitable for evaluating the effectiveness of voice-related therapy.     

The Voice Handicap of Student-Teachers and Risk Factors Perceived to Have a Negative Influence on the Voice

A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was performed. The objectives of the study were to assess the psychosocial impact of current voice complaints as perceived by student-teachers with voice complaints in comparison with student-teachers without voice complaints, and to observe the pattern of risk factors in relation to their voice handicap. Subjects in the general population without a voice-demanding profession were selected as a reference group for limited comparison with the total group of student-teachers (future professional voice users). The respondents to the questionnaires were anonymous. Among the student-teachers, 17.2% reported current voice complaints in comparison with 9.7% of the reference group, and the odds ratio was 1.94, which showed the relative risk. Student-teachers had significantly greater total Voice Handicap Index (VHI) scores than the reference group (P = 0.034). The VHI subscale scores were not significantly different (P > 0.05). Student-teachers who reported current voice complaints had a significantly higher total VHI and subscale scores than student teachers without voice complaints (P < 0.001). Of the student-teachers without voice complaints, 17.0% had VHI scores greater than the 75th percentile. These persons may be neglecting their voice handicap and probably represent the false-negative cases in the estimation of voice complaints. Logistic regression analysis of each of the given risk factors with the VHI as the independent variable showed that the perceived negative influence of the given risk factors on their voices was significantly greater with increasing VHI scores across the VHI range. A significant correlation was observed between the number of perceived risk factors and increasing VHI scores across the VHI range. An increased awareness of risk factors in relation to their voice handicap would serve to motivate student-teachers to change factors that contributed to their voice problem. Attention to all risk factors, which the subjects perceive to be a risk, would aid in effective management of their voice handicap.