Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Grading of the Voice Handicap Index].

Authors: E, Grässel; U, Hoppe; F, Rosanowski;

[Grading of the Voice Handicap Index].

Abstract

The Voice Handicap Index (VHI) questionnaire is currently regarded as the gold standard for the measurement of subjective suffering caused by dysphonia. The object of this study was to show how to weight or grade the result yielded by the VHI. To this end, the result obtained with the VHI was graded against the external criterion of health-related quality of life and also compared with the VHI results obtained in persons not affected by dysphonia.A total of 101 patients (61 women, 40 men) aged between 19 and 86 (48.4 +/- 14.6) years and suffering from benign dysphonia (organic in 62%, functional in 38%: 62% and 38%, respectively in the women, 63% and 37%, respectively, in the men) took part in the study. The instruments used were a German version of the VHI and the SF-36 Health Survey on health-related quality of life, which is commercially available.There are two subscales to the SF-36, but only the values for physical health were significantly reduced and correlated significantly with the results on the VHI scale. This subscale was therefore used as the external standard for grading of the VHI results. Following the separation of the VHI results recorded in the nondysphonic test subjects a four-point grading of the VHI results emerged.VHI values of 0-11 are classified as grade 0 suffering (almost certainly not noticeable), while values of 12-28 reflect grade 1 (more likely unnoticeable than conspicuous) suffering; values of 29-56 reflect grade 2 suffering (more probably noticeable than not), and values of 57-120 suggest a classification of certainly noticeable and are graded as grade 3 suffering.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Adult, Aged, 80 and over, Male, Adolescent, Pain, Reproducibility of Results, Middle Aged, Dysphonia, Sensitivity and Specificity, Young Adult, Germany, Surveys and Questionnaires, Quality of Life, Health Status Indicators, Humans, Female, Aged

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    42
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
42
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!