Primary odynophonia: When pain is out of proportion to dysphonia.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Odynophonia is generally regarded as a symptom of a voice disorder. However, a subset of patients with odynophonia have debilitating pain out of proportion to the relatively mild degree of dysphonia and are not responsive to voice therapy. The goals of this study were to 1) describe the symptomatology of this subset of patients and differentiate it from typical odynophonia, 2) propose alternate models to explain this phenomenon of primary odynophonia, and 3) present a new treatment paradigm based on the proposed models. STUDY DESIGN: Case series. METHODS: Inclusion criteria were complaint of persistent pain associated with voicing, normal vocal fold mobility, complete glottic closure, and limited or lack of response of pain to voice therapy. Presenting symptoms, voice evaluation, and treatment outcomes were reviewed. RESULTS: Eleven patients fit the inclusion criteria. The degree of pain did not follow the trajectory of vocal improvement with therapy. The pain was stagnant or worsened with voice exercises. The most dramatic improvement came about in one patient who received false vocal fold Botox injections, and another who received thyrohyoid lidocaine/triamcinolone injection. We propose that these patients had developed primary odynophonia, in which the pain had become self-sustaining and no longer responded to correction of hyperfunctional vocal behavior. The mechanism of pain persistence may involve superior laryngeal neuralgia, cartilaginous or ligamentous inflammation, and/or central sensitization. CONCLUSIONS: A minority of patients have primary odynophonia distinct from typical odynophonia. Direct treatment of pain may be advisable prior to or in conjunction with voice therapy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 130:E183-E189, 2020.

Current and emerging concepts in muscle tension dysphonia: a 30-month review.

UNLABELLED: The modern theory of hoarseness is that there are multifactorial etiologies contributing to the voice problem. The hypothesis of this study is that muscle tension dysphonia is multifactorial with various contributing etiologies. METHODS: This project is a retrospective chart review of all patients seen in the Voice Speech and Language Service and Swallowing Center at our institution with a diagnosis of muscle tension (functional hypertensive) dysphonia over a 30-month period. A literature search and review is also performed regarding current and emerging concepts of muscle tension dysphonia. RESULTS: One hundred fifty subjects were identified (60% female, 40% male, with a mean age of 42.3 years). Significant factors in patient history believed to contribute to abnormal voice production were gastroesophageal reflux in 49%, high stress levels in 18%, excessive amounts of voice use in 63%, and excessive loudness demands on voice use in 23%. Otolaryngologic evaluation was performed in 82% of patients, in whom lesions, significant vocal fold edema, or paralysis/paresis was identified in 52.3%. Speech pathology assessment revealed poor breath support, inappropriately low pitch, and visible cervical neck tension in the majority of patients. Inappropriate intensity was observed in 23.3% of patients. This set of multiple contributing factors is discussed in the context of current and emerging understanding of muscle tension dysphonia. CONCLUSIONS: Results confirm multifactorial etiologies contributing to hoarseness in the patients identified with muscle tension dysphonia. An interdisciplinary approach to treating all contributing factors portends the best prognosis.

What information do clinicians use in recommending oral versus nonoral feeding in oropharyngeal dysphagic patients?

There is little evidence regarding the type(s) of information clinicians use to make the recommendation for oral or nonoral feeding in patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia. This study represents a first step toward identifying data used by clinicians to make this recommendation and how clinical experience may affect the recommendation. Thirteen variables were considered critical in making the oral vs. nonoral decision by the 23 clinicians working in dysphagia. These variables were then used by the clinicians to independently recommend oral vs. nonoral feeding or partial oral with nonoral feeding for the 20 anonymous patients whose modified barium swallows were sent on a videotape to each clinician. Clinicians also received data on the 13 variables for each patient. Results of clinician agreement on the recommendation of full oral and nonoral only were quite high, as measured by Kappa statistics. In an analysis of which of the 13 criteria clinicians used in making their recommendations, amount of aspiration was the criterion with the highest frequency. Recommendations for use of postures and maneuvers and the effect of clinician experience on these choices were also analyzed.