RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Call center employees are professional voice users and use their voices extensively while performing their professional functions. The purpose of this study is to examine whether a higher occupational voice burden among call center employees affects voice fatigue and perception. METHODS: A total of 114 adult individuals working in call centers who were not diagnosed with any voice disorder (study group, n = 57) and who were not professional voice users (control group, n = 57) were included in this study. Demographic information, the Voice Fatigue Index (VFI), and the Voice Handicap Index-10 (VHI-10) were administered to all participants. Sub-factors of the VFI, such as tiredness and avoidance of voice use (factor 1), physical discomfort after voice use (factor 2), and improvement in symptoms with rest (factor 3), were also examined. RESULTS: Each group included 71.9% females (n = 41) and 28.1% men (n = 16). The scores of VFI factor 1, VFI factor 2, 3, VFITOTAL, and VHI-10 in the study group were statistically higher than those in the control group. The average VFI factor 2, VFI factor 3, and VFITOTAL scores of females in the study group were considerably greater than the average scores of men. The VFI and its sub-factors, as well as the VHI-10 scores of the study group whose daily working hours were 8 hours or less and 8 hours or more, did not vary significantly. CONCLUSIONS: It has been observed that call center employees experience voice fatigue, which has an impact on voice perception in their professional functions. As a result of their heavy vocal load, contact center workers may be at a higher risk of acquiring voice disorders. Voice fatigue must be taken into account in the assessment and intervention of contact center employees by professionals and therapists working in the field of voice.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: We investigated the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Screening Index for Voice Disorder (SIVD-TR). METHODS: The original SIVD1 translated into Turkish, followed by a translation back into English by a linguist. The text was finalized by an evaluation committee. This translated version was then administered to a cohort of 223 teachers in Ankara, Turkey, encompassing both those with and without voice disorders (WVD and WOVD). After a duration of 7-14days, a random selection of 53 teachers underwent the questionnaire once more. Statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate the reliability and validity of the index. Cronbach's alpha and test-retest methods were used to scale the reliability. A cutoff point was determined to decide the risk of a voice disorder, by using a Receiver Operating Characteristic curve. The validation process is concluded by computing sensitivity and specificity values, comparing mean scores between WVD and WOVD subjects, and finally examining correlations between SIVD-TR and the Turkish version of the Voice Handicap Index (VHI-10). RESULTS: The internal consistency reliability exhibited high significance, with Cronbach's alpha measuring at 0.872. The test-retest correlation coefficient for the total scores was 0.80. The SIVD-TR consists of 12 symptoms, each accounting for 1 point on the scale. The identified cutoff for identifying the risk of a voice disorder is 4 (four) symptoms, with a sensitivity of 55.2%. A correlation of 69% was observed between SIVD-TR and VHI-TR. A significant association was noted between the risk of having a voice disorder and the actual presence of a voice disorder. Subjects with a voice disorder exhibited higher mean SIVD scores, providing further evidence of the questionnaire's discriminative validity. CONCLUSION: The Turkish adaptation of SIVD demonstrated both reliability and validity, establishing itself as a robust tool for identifying voice disorders.