Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System for Voice Therapy: Application to Everyday Clinical Care.

PURPOSE: Rehabilitation intervention descriptions often do not explicitly identify active ingredients or how those ingredients lead to changes in patient functioning. The Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) provides guidance to identify the critical aspects of any rehabilitation therapy and supported the development of standardly named ingredients and targets in voice therapy (Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System for Voice Therapy [RTSS-Voice]). This study sought to test the content validity of the RTSS-Voice and determine if the RTSS-Voice can be used to identify commonalities and differences in treatment (criterion validity) across clinicians in everyday clinical practice. METHOD: Five speech-language pathologists from different institutions videotaped one therapy session for 59 patients diagnosed with a voice or upper airway disorder. Specifications were created for each video, and iterative rounds of revisions were completed with the treating clinician and two RTSS experts until consensus was reached on each specification. RESULTS: All 59 sessions were specified without the addition of any targets or ingredients. There were two frequent targets: (a) increased volition and (b) decreased strained voice quality. There were three frequent ingredients: (a) information regarding the patient's capability and motivation to perform a therapeutic behavior, (b) knowledge of results feedback, and (c) opportunities to practice voicing with improved resonance and mean airflow. Across sessions treating vocal hyperfunction, there was large variability across clinicians regarding the types and number of treatment components introduced, types of feedback provided, and vocal practice within spontaneous speech and negative practice. CONCLUSIONS: The RTSS and the RTSS-Voice demonstrated strong content validity, as they comprehensively characterized 59 therapy sessions. They also demonstrated strong criterion validity, as commonalities and differences were identified in everyday voice therapy for vocal hyperfunction across multiple clinicians. Future work to translate RTSS principles and RTSS-Voice terms into clinical documentation can help to understand how clinician and patient variability impacts outcomes and bridge the research-practice gap. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24796875.

Voice Therapy According to the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System: Expert Consensus Ingredients and Targets.

Purpose Clinical trials have demonstrated that standardized voice treatment programs are effective for some patients, but identifying the unique individual treatment ingredients specifically responsible for observed improvements remains elusive. To address this problem, the authors used a taxonomy of voice therapy, the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS), and a Delphi process to develop the RTSS-Voice (expert consensus categories of measurable and unique voice treatment ingredients and targets). Method Initial targets and ingredients were derived from a taxonomy of voice therapy. Through six Delphi Rounds, 10 vocal rehabilitation experts rated the measurability and uniqueness of individual treatment targets and ingredients. After each round, revisions (guided by the experts' feedback) were finalized among a primary reader (a voice therapy expert) and two external readers (rehabilitation experts outside the field of voice). Consensus was established when the label and definition of an ingredient or target reached a supramajority threshold (≥ 8 of 10 expert agreement). Results Thirty-five target and 19 ingredient categories were agreed to be measurable, unique, and accurate reflections of the rules and terminology of the RTSS. Operational definitions for each category included differences in the way ingredients are delivered and the way individual targets are modified by those ingredients. Conclusions The consensus labels and operationalized ingredients and targets making up the RTSS-Voice have potential to improve voice therapy research, practice, and education/training. The methods used to develop these lists may be useful for other speech, language, and hearing treatment specifications. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.15243357.

Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System: Methodology to Identify and Describe Unique Targets and Ingredients.

Although significant advances have been made in measuring the outcomes of rehabilitation interventions, comparably less progress has been made in measuring the treatment processes that lead to improved outcomes. A recently developed framework called the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) has potential to identify which clinician actions (ie, ingredients) actively improve specific patient functions (ie, targets). However, the RTSS does not provide methodology for standardly identifying specific unique targets or ingredients. Without a method to evaluate the uniqueness of an individual target or ingredient, it is difficult to know whether variations in treatment descriptions are synonymous (ie, different words describing the same treatment) or meaningfully different (eg, different words describing different treatments or variations of the same treatment). A recent project used vocal rehabilitation ingredients and targets to create RTSS-based lists of unique overarching target and ingredient categories with underlying dimensions describing how individual ingredients and targets vary within those categories. The primary purpose of this article is to describe the challenges encountered during the project and the methodology developed to address those challenges. Because the methodology was based on the RTSS's broadly applicable framework, it can be used across all areas of rehabilitation regardless of the discipline (speech-language pathology, physical therapy, occupational therapy, psychology, etc) or impairment domain (language, cognition, ambulation, upper extremity training, etc). The resulting standard operationalized lists of targets and ingredients have high face and content validity. The lists may also facilitate implementation of the RTSS in research, education, interdisciplinary communication, and everyday treatment.

Perceptual voice analysis of patients with subglottic stenosis.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the perceptual assessment of vocal quality in subglottic stenosis (SGS) patients and to identify risk factors for dysphonia. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective review, academic center. METHODS: Perceptual voice assessment using GRBAS scale (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, Strain); patient characteristics determined for 31 SGS cases. RESULTS: The mean GRBAS (0 to 3 scale, 0 = normal quality) for SGS patients at their initial visit was G(1.4)R(1.2)B(0.5)A(0.5)S(1.1). For males vs females: G(2.1 vs 1.1)R(2.0 vs 0.8)B(1.0 vs 0.4)A(1.0 vs 0.3)S(1.7 vs 0.9). The Grade (P < 0.03), Breathiness (P < 0.04), and Asthenia (P < 0.02) assessments were significantly more dysphonic in patients with multilevel stenosis; vocal fold motion impairment (VFMI) also impacted overall Grade (P < 0.01). Overall Grade (P < 0.002), Roughness (P < 0.007), and Breathiness (P < 0.006) were significantly worse in patients with prior airway surgery. CONCLUSION: SGS patients demonstrate a mild to moderate change in perceptual voice characteristics with males in this series being more affected than females. Negative risk factors include multiple stenoses, VFMI, and previous airway surgery. SIGNIFICANCE: This is the first systematic report of perceptual voice assessment in subglottic stenosis. SGS patients have notable degrees of dysphonia with identifiable risk factors.