SAMI: an M-Health application to telemonitor intelligibility and speech disorder severity in head and neck cancers.

Perceptual measures, such as intelligibility and speech disorder severity, are widely used in the clinical assessment of speech disorders in patients treated for oral or oropharyngeal cancer. Despite their widespread usage, these measures are known to be subjective and hard to reproduce. Therefore, an M-Health assessment based on an automatic prediction has been seen as a more robust and reliable alternative. Despite recent progress, these automatic approaches still remain somewhat theoretical, and a need to implement them in real clinical practice rises. Hence, in the present work we introduce SAMI, a clinical mobile application used to predict speech intelligibility and disorder severity as well as to monitor patient progress on these measures over time. The first part of this work illustrates the design and development of the systems supported by SAMI. Here, we show how deep neural speaker embeddings are used to automatically regress speech disorder measurements (intelligibility and severity), as well as the training and validation of the system on a French corpus of head and neck cancer. Furthermore, we also test our model on a secondary corpus recorded in real clinical conditions. The second part details the results obtained from the deployment of our system in a real clinical environment, over the course of several weeks. In this section, the results obtained with SAMI are compared to an a posteriori perceptual evaluation, conducted by a set of experts on the new recorded data. The comparison suggests a high correlation and a low error between the perceptual and automatic evaluations, validating the clinical usage of the proposed application.

Automatic modelling of perceptual judges in the context of head and neck cancer speech intelligibility.

BACKGROUND: Perceptual measures such as speech intelligibility are known to be biased, variant and subjective, to which an automatic approach has been seen as a more reliable alternative. On the other hand, automatic approaches tend to lack explainability, an aspect that can prevent the widespread usage of these technologies clinically. AIMS: In the present work, we aim to study the relationship between four perceptual parameters and speech intelligibility by automatically modelling the behaviour of six perceptual judges, in the context of head and neck cancer. From this evaluation we want to assess the different levels of relevance of each parameter as well as the different judge profiles that arise, both perceptually and automatically. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Based on a passage reading task from the Carcinologic Speech Severity Index (C2SI) corpus, six expert listeners assessed the voice quality, resonance, prosody and phonemic distortions, as well as the speech intelligibility of patients treated for oral or oropharyngeal cancer. A statistical analysis and an ensemble of automatic systems, one per judge, were devised, where speech intelligibility is predicted as a function of the four aforementioned perceptual parameters of voice quality, resonance, prosody and phonemic distortions. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: The results suggest that we can automatically predict speech intelligibility as a function of the four aforementioned perceptual parameters, achieving a high correlation of 0.775 (Spearman's ρ). Furthermore, different judge profiles were found perceptually that were successfully modelled automatically. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The four investigated perceptual parameters influence the global rating of speech intelligibility, showing that different judge profiles emerge. The proposed automatic approach displayed a more uniform profile across all judges, displaying a more reliable, unbiased and objective prediction. The system also adds an extra layer of interpretability, since speech intelligibility is regressed as a direct function of the individual prediction of the four perceptual parameters, an improvement over more black box approaches. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject Speech intelligibility is a clinical measure typically used in the post-treatment assessment of speech affecting disorders, such as head and neck cancer. Their perceptual assessment is currently the main method of evaluation; however, it is known to be quite subjective since intelligibility can be seen as a combination of other perceptual parameters (voice quality, resonance, etc.). Given this, automatic approaches have been seen as a more viable alternative to the traditionally used perceptual assessments. What this study adds to existing knowledge The present work introduces a study based on the relationship between four perceptual parameters (voice quality, resonance, prosody and phonemic distortions) and speech intelligibility, by automatically modelling the behaviour of six perceptual judges. The results suggest that different judge profiles arise, both in the perceptual case as well as in the automatic models. These different profiles found showcase the different schools of thought that perceptual judges have, in comparison to the automatic judges, that display more uniform levels of relevance across all the four perceptual parameters. This aspect shows that an automatic approach promotes unbiased, reliable and more objective predictions. What are the clinical implications of this work? The automatic prediction of speech intelligibility, using a combination of four perceptual parameters, show that these approaches can achieve high correlations with the reference scores while maintaining a certain degree of explainability. The more uniform judge profiles found on the automatic case also display less biased results towards the four perceptual parameters. This aspect facilitates the clinical implementation of this class of systems, as opposed to the more subjective and harder to reproduce perceptual assessments.

Expert Consensus on Clinical Decision Making in the Disease Trajectory of Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Adults: An International Delphi Study.

To date, no consensus exists on the complex clinical decision-making processes involved in oropharyngeal dysphagia, or swallowing disorders. This study aimed to develop an international consensus on a clinical decision tree for the disease trajectory of oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults, taking into account physiological impairments of swallowing, risk factors for the development of complications from oropharyngeal dysphagia, and prognostic factors for treatment outcomes. Using the Delphi technique, consensus was achieved among dysphagia experts across 31 countries, resulting in a total of 10 physiological impairments, 23 risk factors and 21 prognostic factors identified as relevant factors in the clinical decision-making process. Factors most contributing to the severity of oropharyngeal dysphagia were 'Aspiration', 'Incomplete ejection or failure to eject aspirated materials from the airways', 'Weak or absent cough', 'Choking' and 'Sensory deficits in the oropharynx'. To connect the existing theoretical framework to clinical practice, future research will develop the current findings by corroborating the domains based on relevant factors for clinical decision making and those that contribute to the severity of oropharyngeal dysphagia.

Guidelines for the management of chronic cough in adults. Endorsed by the French speaking society of respiratory diseases (Société de Pneumologie de Langue Française, SPLF), the Société Française d'Oto-Rhino-Laryngologie et de Chirurgie de la Face et du Cou (SFORL), the Société Française de Phoniatrie et de Laryngologie (SFPL), the Société Nationale Française de Gastro-entérologie (SNFGE).

Patients with chronic cough experience a high alteration of quality of life. Moreover, chronic cough is a complex entity with numerous etiologies and treatments. In order to help clinicians involved in the management of patients with chronic cough, guidelines on chronic cough have been established by a group of French experts. These guidelines address the definitions of chronic cough and the initial management of patients with chronic cough. We present herein second-line tests that might be considered in patients with cough persistence despite initial management. Experts also propose a definition of unexplained or refractory chronic cough (URCC) in order to better identify patients whose cough persists despite optimal management. Finally, these guidelines address the pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions useful in URCC. Thus, amitryptilline, pregabalin, gabapentin or morphine combined with speech and/or physical therapy are a mainstay of treatment strategies in URCC. Other treatment options, such as P2 × 3 antagonists, are being developed.

Criteria for creating new standard reading passages for the assessment of speech and voice: A Delphi consensus study.

Standard reading passages allow for the study of the integrated functions of speech and voice components in contextual, running speech, with target stimuli in a controlled environment. In both clinical practice and research, these texts provide rapid insight into the characteristics of the patient's speech, with fewer hesitations than in conversational speech and better predictability by the evaluator. Although a plethora of texts exist in different languages, they present various limitations. A specifically created standardised text in each language allowing for an ecological assessment of speech and voice functions, meeting most required criteria for standard speech and voice assessment and adapted to the target language's cultural and linguistic specificities, would therefore be an interesting option. However, no guidelines exist for the creation of such a reading passage. This article describes the international Delphi consensus study carried out to identify a minimal set of criteria to take into account when creating standard reading passages for an overall speech and voice assessment in adolescents and adults. This survey was conducted in three consecutive rounds; forty experts participated in the first round, with a total dropout of 17% from round 1 to round 3. It results in a minimal set of ten criteria which were selected by a majority of the experts and were rated as most important. This set contains five phoneme-level, two word-level, two sentence-level criteria and one global-level criterion. It can be used as a general guideline for the creation of standard reading passages in Indo-European Romance and Germanic languages such as English, French and German. The construction of a new reading passage in French following this guideline is briefly described.

Development and Preliminary Validation of the Questionnaire "Evaluation of the Constitution of Social Circles" in Patients Treated for Cancer of the Upper Aerodigestive Tract.

PURPOSE: The constitution of social circles around patients treated for cancer of the upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) has a major influence on factors that affect quality of life (QOL) but is poorly assessed, mainly due to a lack of tools. The objective of this study is to develop a questionnaire that assesses the constitution of social circles in a population treated for UADT cancer and to analyze the construct (structural and clinical validity) and criterion validity. METHODS: The Evaluation of the Constitution of Social Circles (ECSC) questionnaire was developed in French by a committee of experts. Structural validity was analyzed using inter-item correlations. The scores of a group of patients treated for UADT cancer were compared with those of a group of healthy subjects (clinical validity). For criterion validity, the ECSC scores were compared to those from various questionnaires that assess social functioning (QFS), psychological status (HAD), perceived speech impairment (PHI), and QOL (EORTC QLQ-H&N35) in patients. RESULTS: Structural validity shows low to moderate inter-item correlations which is consistent with the construction of the questionnaire not assessing underlying concepts. Clinical validity was satisfactory regarding the frequency of contact (p = 0.01), satisfaction with the frequency of contact in the private circle (p = 0.03), and the size of the social circles of family and friends (p ≤ 0.01). Criterion validity was adequate with moderate correlations between the ECSC scores and the QFS sub-scores of interest (rs > 0.56, p < 0.05). Anxiety (HAD) had a low correlation (|rs| = 0.46, p < 0.05) with satisfaction with exchanges and the frequency of contact with family. Satisfaction with exchanges with the private circle was moderately correlated with the EORTC QLQ-H&N35 score (rs = 0.56, p = 0.01) and showed a negative trend on the PHI (rs < -0.39, p ≥ 0.05). CONCLUSION: While the test-retest reliability is yet to be evaluated and the sample size should be increased, this preliminary study shows that the ECSC is a valid tool for assessing the constitution of social circles in patients treated for UADT cancer. It highlights the links between social circles and their functional impact on communication and QOL.

Development of a holistic communication score (HoCoS) in patients treated for oral or oropharyngeal cancer: Preliminary validation.

BACKGROUND: In head and neck cancer, many tools exist to measure speech impairment, but few evaluate the impact on communication abilities. Some self-administered questionnaires are available to assess general activity limitations including communication. Others are not validated in oncology. These different tools result in scores that does not provide an accurate measure of the communication limitations perceived by the patients. AIM: To develop a holistic score measuring the functional impact of speech disorders on communication in patients treated for oral or oropharyngeal cancer, in two steps: its construction and its validation. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Patients treated for oral/oropharyngeal cancer filled six self-questionnaires: two about communicative dynamics (ECVB and DIP), two assessing speech function (PHI and CHI) and two relating to quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-H&N35). A total of 174 items were initially collected. A dimensionality reduction methodology was then applied. Face validity analysis led to eliminate non-relevant items by surveying a panel of nine experts from communication-related disciplines (linguistics, medicine, speech pathology, computer science). Construct validity analysis led to eliminate redundant and insufficiently variable items. Finally, the holistic communication score was elaborated by principal component factor and validated using cross-validation and latent profile analysis. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: A total of 25 patients filled the questionnaires (median age = 67 years, EIQ = 12; 15 men, 10 women; oral cavity = 14, oropharynx = 10, two locations = 1). After face validity analysis, 44 items were retained (κ > 0.80). Four additional items were excluded because of a very high correlation (r > 0.90) with other items presenting a better dispersion. A total of 40 items were finally included in the factor analysis. A post-analysis score prediction was performed (mean = 100; SD = 10). A total of 24 items are finally retained for the construction of the holistic communication score (HoCoS): 19 items from questionnaires assessing communicative dynamics (13 from the ECVB and six from the DIP), four items from a perceived speech impairment questionnaire (PHI) and one from a quality-of-life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-H&N35). The reliability is good (five-fold cross-validation: rs = 0.91) and the complementary latent profile analysis shows a good validity of the HoCoS, clustering subjects by level of communication performance. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: A global score allowing a measure of the impact of the speech disorder on communication was developed. It fills the lack of this type of score in head and neck oncology and allows the better understanding of the functional and psychosocial consequences of the pathology in the patients' follow-up. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Because of their anatomical location, head and neck cancer degrades the speech abilities. Few tools currently allow the assessment of the impact of the speech disorder on communication abilities. In ENT oncology, self-administered questionnaires are available to assess activity limitations and participation restrictions (International Classification of Functioning (ICF)-WHO). Other tools from the field of neurology allow an evaluation of communication dynamics. But these different tools, constructed by items, give global additive or averaged scores. This implies an identical weighting of each item, resulting in global scores that are not very representative of the communication limitations really perceived by the patients. What this paper adds to existing knowledge A new global holistic score allowing a measurement of the impact of speech impairment on communication after treatment of oral or oropharyngeal cancer has been developed. The methodology of its construction allows a better reflection of the symptomatological, pragmatic and psychosocial elements leading to a degradation of communication abilities. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The developed HoCoS score fills the gap in the absence of this type of tool in head and neck oncology. It may allow a better understanding of the factors involved in the functional and psychosocial limitations of these patients, and better customize their follow-up.

Behavioural Interventions in People with Oropharyngeal Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Clinical Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of behavioural interventions in people with oropharyngeal dysphagia. METHODS: Systematic literature searches were conducted to retrieve randomized controlled trials in four different databases (CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, and PubMed). The methodological quality of eligible articles was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2), after which meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 37 studies were included. Overall, a significant, large pre-post interventions effect size was found. To compare different types of interventions, all behavioural interventions and conventional dysphagia treatment comparison groups were categorised into compensatory, rehabilitative, and combined compensatory and rehabilitative interventions. Overall, significant treatment effects were identified favouring behavioural interventions. In particular, large effect sizes were found when comparing rehabilitative interventions with no dysphagia treatment, and combined interventions with compensatory conventional dysphagia treatment. When comparing selected interventions versus conventional dysphagia treatment, significant, large effect sizes were found in favour of Shaker exercise, chin tuck against resistance exercise, and expiratory muscle strength training. CONCLUSIONS: Behavioural interventions show promising effects in people with oropharyngeal dysphagia. However, due to high heterogeneity between studies, generalisations of meta-analyses need to be interpreted with care.

Neurostimulation in People with Oropharyngeal Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials-Part II: Brain Neurostimulation.

Objective. To assess the effects of brain neurostimulation (i.e., repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation [rTMS] and transcranial direct current stimulation [tDCS]) in people with oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD). Methods. Systematic literature searches were conducted in four electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, and PubMed) to retrieve randomised controlled trials (RCTs) only. Using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2), the methodological quality of included studies was evaluated, after which meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model. Results. In total, 24 studies reporting on brain neurostimulation were included: 11 studies on rTMS, 9 studies on tDCS, and 4 studies on combined neurostimulation interventions. Overall, within-group meta-analysis and between-group analysis for rTMS identified significant large and small effects in favour of stimulation, respectively. For tDCS, overall within-group analysis and between-group analysis identified significant large and moderate effects in favour of stimulation, respectively. Conclusion. Both rTMS and tDCS show promising effects in people with oropharyngeal dysphagia. However, comparisons between studies were challenging due to high heterogeneity in stimulation protocols and experimental parameters, potential moderators, and inconsistent methodological reporting. Generalisations of meta-analyses need to be interpreted with care. Future research should include large RCTs using standard protocols and reporting guidelines as achieved by international consensus.

Intelligibility and comprehensibility: A Delphi consensus study.

BACKGROUND: Intelligibility and comprehensibility in speech disorders can be assessed both perceptually and instrumentally, but a lack of consensus exists regarding the terminology and related speech measures in both the clinical and scientific fields. AIMS: To draw up a more consensual definition of intelligibility and comprehensibility and to define which assessment methods relate to both concepts, as part of their definition. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A three-round modified Delphi consensus study was carried out among clinicians, researchers and lecturers engaged in activities in speech disorders. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Forty international experts from different fields (mainly clinicians, linguists and computer scientists) participated in the elaboration of a comprehensive definition of intelligibility and comprehensibility and their assessment. While both concepts are linked and contribute to functional human communication, they relate to two different reconstruction levels of the transmitted speech material. Intelligibility refers to the acoustic-phonetic decoding of the utterance, while comprehensibility relates to the reconstruction of the meaning of the message. Consequently, the perceptual assessment of intelligibility requires the use of unpredictable speech material (pseudo-words, minimal word pairs, unpredictable sentences), whereas comprehensibility assessment is meaning and context related and entails more functional speech stimuli and tasks. CONCLUSION & IMPLICATIONS: This consensus study provides the scientific and clinical communities with a better understanding of intelligibility and comprehensibility. A comprehensive definition was drafted, including specifications regarding the tasks that best fit their assessment. The outcome has implications for both clinical practice and scientific research, as the disambiguation improves communication between professionals and thereby increases the efficiency of patient assessment and care and benefits the progress of research as well as research translation. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Intelligibility and comprehensibility in speech disorders can be assessed both perceptually and instrumentally, but a lack of consensus exists regarding the terminology and related speech measures in both the clinical and scientific fields. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This consensus study allowed for a more consensual and comprehensive definition of intelligibility and comprehensibility and their assessment, for clinicians and researchers. The terminological disambiguation helps to improve communication between experts in the field of speech disorders and thereby benefits the progress of research as well as research translation. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Unambiguous communication between professionals, for example, in a multidisciplinary team, allows for the improvement in the efficiency of patient care. Furthermore, this study allowed the assessment tasks that best fit the definition of both intelligibility and comprehensibility to be specified, thereby providing valuable information to improve speech disorder assessment and its standardization.

Construction of an automatic score for the evaluation of speech disorders among patients treated for a cancer of the oral cavity or the oropharynx: The Carcinologic Speech Severity Index.

BACKGROUND: Speech disorders impact quality of life for patients treated with oral cavity and oropharynx cancers. However, there is a lack of uniform and applicable methods for measuring the impact on speech production after treatment in this tumor location. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this work is to (1) model an automatic severity index of speech applicable in clinical practice, that is equivalent or superior to a severity score obtained by human listeners, via several acoustics parameters extracted (a) directly from speech signal and (b) resulting from speech processing and (2) derive an automatic speech intelligibility classification (i.e., mild, moderate, severe) to predict speech disability and handicap by combining the listener comprehension score with self-reported quality of life related to speech. METHODS: Eighty-seven patients treated for cancer of the oral cavity or the oropharynx and 35 controls performed different tasks of speech production and completed questionnaires on speech-related quality of life. The audio recordings were then evaluated by human perception and automatic speech processing. Then, a score was developed through a classic logistic regression model allowing description of the severity of patients' speech disorders. RESULTS: Among the group of parameters subject to extraction from automatic processing of the speech signal, six were retained, producing a correlation at 0.87 with the perceptual reference score, 0.77 with the comprehension score, and 0.5 with speech-related quality of life. The parameters that contributed the most are based on automatic speech recognition systems. These are mainly the automatic average normalized likelihood score on a text reading task and the score of cumulative rankings on pseudowords. The reduced automatic YC2SI is modeled in this way: YC2SIp  = 11.48726 + (1.52926 × Xaveraged normalized likelihood reading ) + (-1.94e-06 × Xscore of cumulative ranks pseudowords ). CONCLUSION: Automatic processing of speech makes it possible to arrive at valid, reliable, and reproducible parameters able to serve as references in the framework of follow-up of patients treated for cancer of the oral cavity or the oropharynx.

Assessment of adult speech disorders: current situation and needs in French-speaking clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION: Speech assessment methods used in clinical practice are varied and mainly perceptual and motor. Reliable assessment of speech disorders is essential for the tailoring of the patient's treatment plan. OBJECTIVE: To describe current clinical practices and identify the shortcomings and needs reported by French-speaking clinicians regarding the assessment of speech disorders in adult patients. METHODS: Data were collected using an online questionnaire for French-speaking speech and language pathologists (SLPs) in Belgium, France, Switzerland, Luxembourg, and Maghreb. Forty-nine questions were grouped into six domains: participant data, educational and occupational background, experience with speech disorders, patient population, tools and tasks for speech assessment, and possible lacks regarding the current assessment of speech disorders. RESULTS: Responses from 119 clinicians were included in the analyses. SLPs generally use "à la carte" assessment with a large variety of tasks and speech samples. About one quarter of them do not use existing assessment batteries. Those who do mostly use them partially. Pseudo-words are rarely used and are absent from standardized batteries, in contrast to the major use of words and sentences. Perceptual evaluation largely prevails (mainly overall ratings of speech "intelligibility", "severity," and "comprehensibility" and percent-correct phonemes), whereas the recording equipment for acoustic measures is not standardized and only scarcely described by the SLPs. The most commonly used questionnaire to assess the functional impact of the speech disorder is the Voice Handicap Index; one quarter of the SLPs does not use any questionnaire. Overall, the available tools are considered only moderately satisfactory. The main reported shortcomings are a lack of objectivity and reproducibility of speech measures; exhaustiveness and consideration of specific speech parameters (prosody, speech rate, and nasality); practicality of the assessment tools. CONCLUSION: This study highlights a lack of standardization of the speech assessment in French-speaking adults and the need to offer new reliable tools for an optimized, accurate speech assessment. The automation of these tools would allow for rapid, reproducible, and accurate measures.

The (head and neck) carcinologic handicap index: validation of a modular type questionnaire and its ability to prioritise patients' needs.

PURPOSE: To validate the upgraded version of the CHI with two new dimensions ("limitation of neck and/or shoulder movements", "changes in physical appearance"). To assess the relationship between CHI scores and patient self-reported management needs. METHODS: 71 patients treated for cancer with ENT complaints and 36 controls were included. Construct validity, internal consistency, criterion validity (using visual analogue scales by dimension), clinical validity (comparison of patient and control scores) and temporal reliability (scores of a second CHI completed after a few days) were studied. A hierarchical ranking of the dimensions according to perceived difficulties was compared to the CHI scores. RESULTS: Correlations were moderate to high between items of the same dimension (0.38 < r<0.73), between scores on the two new dimensions and on the VAS (r > 0.68), and between scores on the two CHI completions (r > 0.67). Cronbach's alphas are greater than 0.72. Patients and controls had significantly different scores in the two new dimensions (Mann-Whitney: p < 0.001). Sensitivity, specificity and AUC calculated between CHI scores and hierarchy ranking determined patient priority cut-off scores for eight of the eleven dimensions. CONCLUSION: The new CHI dimensions have good psychometric qualities. Threshold scores by dimension allow the perceived management needs to be determined.

Effects of oral and oropharyngeal cancer on speech intelligibility using acoustic analysis: Systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The development of automatic tools based on acoustic analysis allows to overcome the limitations of perceptual assessment for patients with head and neck cancer. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic review of literature describing the effects of oral and oropharyngeal cancer on speech intelligibility using acoustic analysis. METHODS: Two databases (PubMed and Embase) were surveyed. The selection process, according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement, led to a final set of 22 articles. RESULTS: Nasalance is studied mainly in oropharyngeal patients. The vowels are mostly studied using formant analysis and vowel space area, the consonants by means of spectral moments with specific parameters according to their phonetic characteristic. Machine learning methods allow classifying "intelligible" or "unintelligible" speech for T3 or T4 tumors. CONCLUSIONS: The development of comprehensive models combining different acoustic measures would allow a better consideration of the functional impact of the speech disorder.

Validation of the French Versions of the Speech Handicap Index and the Phonation Handicap Index in Patients Treated for Cancer of the Oral Cavity or Oropharynx.

CONTEXT: Nowadays, clinical tools are available to evaluate the functional impact of speech disorders in neurological conditions, but few are validated in oncology. Because of their location, cancers of the upper aerodigestive tract directly impact patients' communication skills. Two questionnaires exist in French, the Speech Handicap Index (SHI) and the Phonation Handicap Index (PHI), but none are specifically validated for the head and neck cancer population. Our aim is to evaluate the validity of these 2 questionnaires in a population of patients treated for oral cavity or oropharyngeal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Eighty-seven patients treated for cancer of the oral cavity or oropharynx, and 21 controls filled in the questionnaires during a consultation or 1-day hospitalization. Validation was studied by the analysis of convergent and discriminant validity, clinical validity, criterion validity, and internal consistency. RESULTS: The 2 questionnaires present a coherent structure in 2 distinct dimensions for the SHI, and in 3 dimensions for the PHI. Both tools discriminate patients and healthy subjects (p value <0.001, Mann-Whitney test). The comparison of the SHI and PHI scores with the "social role functioning" dimension of the Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36 chosen as a reference shows similar performances for the 2 questionnaires (ρ > 0.42). Lastly, the internal consistency is good (Cronbach's α > 0.71). CONCLUSION: In patients treated for oral cavity or oropharyngeal cancer, the SHI and PHI are 2 valid and reliable tools for the self-assessment of speech disability. A limitation can be found about criterion validity, because a true gold standard does not exist at the moment. However, the reduced number of questions of the PHI, which implies a shorter completion, leads to prefer this tool over the SHI.

Factors influencing intelligibility and severity of chronic speech disorders of patients treated for oral or oropharyngeal cancer.

PURPOSE: Oral or oropharyngeal tumors degrade patients' speech quality because of their location. The treatment of these cancers also affects the functional outcomes, depending on type (surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy), volume resection (according the size of the tumor) or on the anatomical area treated, and the post-treatment delay. The aim of this work is to determine the factors influencing the chronic speech disorders (in terms of intelligibility and severity) of patients treated for an oral or oropharyngeal cancer. METHODS: Speech-perceptive assessment was led by a panel of six expert speech therapists, on a task of a description of a picture, presented to 87 patients. Clinical and treatment data were gathered by examining medical files. RESULTS: Intelligibility and severity scores in our population were 6.06 (interquartile range 4.2-8) and 7.61 (interquartile range 6.8-9.5) on a maximum of 10. After adjusting for age and anatomical region involved, multivariate analysis showed a principal impact of surgery on both intelligibility and severity, while the size of the tumor significantly affected the intelligibility score [- 143; 95% CI (- 2.21, - 0.65)]. These results are consistent with the definitions of intelligibility and severity of speech disorders. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of information on the impact of tumor location, however, requires more work to contribute to reducing impact on the quality of life of patients.