The Current State and Future Possibilities of Mobile Phone "Voice Analyser" Applications, in Relation to Otorhinolaryngology.

BACKGROUND: A large proportion of the population suffers from voice disorders. The use of mobile phone technology in healthcare is increasing, and this includes applications that can analyze voice. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to review the potential for voice analyzer applications to aid the management of voice disorders. METHODS: A literature search was conducted yielding eight studies which were further analyzed. RESULTS: Seven out of the eight studies concluded that smartphone assessments were comparable to current techniques. Nevertheless there remained some common issues with using applications such as; voice parameters used; voice pathology tested; smartphone software consistency and microphone specifications. CONCLUSIONS: It is clear that further developments are required before a mobile application can be used widely in voice analysis. However, promising results have been obtained thus far, and the benefits of mobile technology in this field, particularly in voice rehabilitation, warrant further research into its widespread implementation.

Speech-Language Pathologists' Use of Intelligibility Measures in Adults With Dysarthria.

PURPOSE: Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who work with adults with dysarthria were surveyed to investigate trends of clinical practice for assessing speech intelligibility. METHOD: Two hundred ninety-six SLPs responded to an online survey October 22-November 30, 2015. RESULTS: Findings showed that 35% of SLPs lacked access to any standardized assessments of intelligibility, with 66% of these implicating cost as the main reason. Work settings played a role, as all SLPs working in Veterans Affairs hospitals and 97% of SLPs working in university or research clinics reported access to at least one formal assessment. Even with access to formal tools to measure intelligibility, most SLPs preferred less formal measures. It is surprising to note that many SLPs reported using physical examinations (e.g., of cranial nerves and oral mechanisms) to measure speech intelligibility. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate the need to increase SLP familiarity with, and access to, currently available standardized assessments, as well as to improve education regarding the fundamental need to rate speech to assess intelligibility. Clinicians may also benefit from new standardized methods to objectively assess intelligibility that are accessible, practical, and efficient.

An overview of managing stuttering in Japan.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to describe the rapid development of speech-language pathology in Japan since governmental licensing started in 1997 and to summarize the current trends in assessing and treating stuttering for preschoolers, school-age children, adolescents, and adults. METHOD: The authors review relevant information about the current assessment and treatment services for people who stutter in Japan and discuss the issues and challenges faced by speech-language pathologists in managing stuttering. CONCLUSION: It is predicted that as expertise in stuttering grows in Japan, the role of stuttering specialists in allied health, school districts, and research will increase.

Auditory-perceptual evaluation of disordered voice quality: pros, cons and future directions.

Auditory-perceptual evaluation is the most commonly used clinical voice assessment method, and is often considered a gold standard for documentation of voice disorders. This view has arisen for many reasons, including the fact that voice quality is perceptual in nature and that the perceptual characteristics of voice have greater intuitive meaning and shared reality among listeners than do many instrumental measures. Other factors include limitations in the validity and reliability of instrumental methods and lack of agreement as to the most sensitive and specific instrumental measures of voice quality. Perceptual evaluation has, however, been heavily criticised because it is subjective. As a result, listener reliability is not always adequate and auditory-perceptual ratings can be confounded by factors such as the listener's shifting internal standards, listener experience, type of rating scale used and the voice sample being evaluated. This paper discusses these pros and cons of perceptual evaluation, and outlines clinical strategies and research approaches that may lead to improvements in the assessment of voice quality. In particular, clinicians are advised to use multiple methods of voice quality evaluation, and to include both subjective and objective evaluation tools.