RESUMO
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of symptoms of a voice problem in college students and to assess if general health factors and vocal hygiene habits serve as risk factors for symptoms of a voice problem in this population. METHODS: Participants (n = 289) from a university in the United States completed an online survey that included demographic and general health questions, the Screen6 questionnaire, and a list of 23 vocal hygiene habits. Four participants were excluded due to receiving voice therapy and the remaining 285 participants were divided into two groups based on the results of the Screen6 questionnaire: those with two or more symptoms of a voice problem daily or weekly (n = 84) and those with fewer symptoms (n = 201). RESULTS: 29.5% of the college students in this study experienced two or more symptoms weekly or daily. Throat clearing was the most commonly reported symptom. Risk factors included having a postnasal drip, experiencing severe seasonal allergies, and taking medication for depression or anxiety. The following vocal hygiene habits were reported to occur more frequently in those with symptoms of a voice problem: use your voice until it hurts, use extra muscular effort while talking, use extra respiratory effort while talking, use a pitch that you think is too high, and use a pitch that you think is too low. Nonuse behaviors, such as water and caffeine consumption, did not vary significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS: People with two or more symptoms of a voice problem daily or weekly report using their voice in a way that may contribute to experiencing these symptoms. Vocal hygiene education for this demographic may be more impactful if it is catered to how the voice is used rather than nonuse voice care.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To determine if the Vocal Priorities Questionnaire (VPQ) could be used in people who were not seeking treatment for a voice problem. To determine if the VPQ could be used to compare groups based on self-reported voice problems. To determine if vocal priorities (loudness, clarity, pitch, pitch range) vary based on self-reported voice problems. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cross-sectional study. METHODS: An online survey that contained demographic questions, questions about self-reported voice problems, and the VPQ was distributed to undergraduate university students. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were completed to determine if the VPQ was appropriate for use in this population. Invariance testing determined if the VPQ could be used to compare groups. Cronbach's alpha determined internal consistency. An analysis of variance was conducted to compare the scores for each vocal priority across three self-reported voice problem categories: never, current, and past. RESULTS: Responses from 285 participants were analyzed. An initial CFA found that the four-priority VPQ originally proposed did not have adequate fit indices. An EFA and modified CFA revealed that four priorities were still present, but "not having a gravelly voice" fit better with the priority of pitch, not clarity. With this model, invariance was verified and Cronbach's alpha indicated internal consistency. Loudness was the top vocal priority for 34.8%. In those with a past voice problem, clarity was scored higher compared to those with a current voice problem, F(2, 284) = 5.298, P = 0.006, and pitch range was scored higher compared to those who had never experienced a voice problem, F(2, 284) = 5.431, P = 0.005. CONCLUSIONS: A modified four-priority version of the VPQ presented with acceptable dimensionality and invariance for college students with and without self-reported voice problems. Scores for clarity and pitch range were influenced by experiences with voice problems.