Objectives
To ascertain whether cochlear implantation (CI), without specific vocal rehabilitation, is associated with changes in perceptual and acoustic vocal parameters in adults with severe to profound postlingual deafness.Hypothesis
Merely restoring auditory feedback could allow the individual to make necessary adjustments in vocal pattern.Study Design
Prospective and longitudinal.Methods
The experimental group composed of 40 postlingually deaf adults (20 males and 20 females) with no previous laryngeal or voice disorders. Participants’ voices were recorded before CI and 6–9 months after CI. To check for chance modifications between two evaluations, a control group of 12 postlingually deaf adults, six male and six female, without CI was also evaluated. All sessions composed of the recording of read sentences from Consensus Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice and sustained vowel /a/. Auditory and acoustic analyses were then conducted.Results
We found a statistically significant reduction in overall severity, strain, loudness, and instability in auditory analysis. In vocal acoustic analysis, we found statistically significant reduction fundamental frequency (F0) values (in male participants) and F0 variability (in both genders). The control group showed no statistically significant changes in most vocal parameters assessed, apart from pitch and F0 (in female participants only). On comparing the interval of variation of results between the experimental and control groups, we found no statistically significant difference in vocal parameters between CI recipients and nonrecipients, with the exception of F0 variability in male participants.Conclusions
The patients in our sample showed changes in overall severity, strain, loudness, and instability values, and reductions in F0 and its variability. On comparing the variation of results between the groups, we were able to prove in our study that implant recipients postlingually deaf adults (experimental group), without specific vocal rehabilitation, differed from nonrecipients (control group) in loudness and F0 variability sustained vowel /a/ in male participants. 相似文献Test 1: Text reading was recorded with two identical microphones in the ears of a subject. One ear was covered with HF, and the other was free. Four subjects attended this test. Tests 2 and 3: A reading sample was recorded from 13 subjects and a song from 12 subjects without and with HF on. Test 4: Six females repeated [pa:p:a] in speaking and singing modes without and with HF on same pitch and sound level.
Long-term average spectra were made (Tests 1–3), and formant frequencies, fundamental frequency, and sound level were measured (Tests 2 and 3). Subglottic pressure was estimated from oral pressure in [p], and simultaneously electroglottography (EGG) was registered during voicing on [a:] (Test 4). Voice quality in speech and singing was evaluated by three professional voice trainers (Tests 2–4).
HF seemed to enhance sound perceivable at the whole range studied (0–8 kHz), with the greatest enhancement (up to ca 25 dB) being at 1–3 kHz and at 4–7 kHz. The subjects tended to decrease loudness with HF (when sound level was not being monitored). In more than half of the cases, voice quality was evaluated “less strained” and “better controlled” with HF. When pitch and loudness were constant, no clear differences were heard but closed quotient of the EGG signal was higher and the signal more skewed, suggesting a better glottal closure and/or diminished activity of the thyroarytenoid muscle. 相似文献