Outcome Measurements After Oral Cancer Treatment: Speech and Speech-related Aspects--an Overview

Overview

Journal Oral Maxillofac Surg

Specialties Dentistry
General Surgery

Date 2012 Aug 7

PMID 22864645

Citations 15

Authors

M Schuster

F Stelzle

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Oral cancer and its surgical treatment impair speech quality by an alteration of the vocal tract. Local size and stage of the tumour as well as surgical and adjuvant treatment modalities have an impact on the functional outcome of patients' speech rehabilitation. It was the aim of this overview to specifiy speech and speech-related aspects as well as to delineate measurement methods of speech outcome in patients with oral cancer by a review of the literature.

Methods: The review is based on a Medline Search on "speech", "cancer", "oral cancer", "malignoma mouth", "intelligibility", "formant", "ultrasound".

Discussion: In particular, speech intelligibility is inevitable for the social interaction of patients which is highly correlated with the patient's quality of life. However, speech outcome measurement shows a variety of methods without an international standardisation. Additionally, several co-aspects of speech production have to be considered: tongue mobility, voice production, velopharyngeal closure and neural coordination are important influencing factors. Speech assessment is traditionally performed by perceptual methods on a subjective or semi-subjective base. More objective, technical-based methods of speech evaluation are in development and under research.

Purpose: It was the aim of this overview to specify speech and speech-related aspects as well as to delineate measurement methods of speech outcome in patients with oral cancer by a review of the current literature.

Citing Articles

Articulatory-kinematic changes in speech following surgical treatment for oral or oropharyngeal cancer: A systematic review.

Tienkamp T, Rebernik T, DCruz R, van Son R, Wieling M, Witjes M Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2024; 60(1):e13148.

PMID: 39692586 PMC: 11654356. DOI: 10.1111/1460-6984.13148.

Articulation in postoperative patients treated for early- and advanced-stage tongue cancer.

Ho C, Wu C, Lai C, Huang P, Li H Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):25604.

PMID: 39463430 PMC: 11514312. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-77807-7.

Return to work in head and neck cancer survivors: its relationship with functional, psychological, and disease-treatment factors.

Tsai P, Wang C, Fang Y, Chen Y, Chen S, Chen M J Cancer Surviv. 2022; 17(6):1715-1724.

PMID: 35900687 DOI: 10.1007/s11764-022-01224-w.

Validation of an Intelligibility Assessment Tool in an Indian Language for Perceptual Speech Analysis in Oral Cancer Patients.

Dokhe Y, Thankappan K, Sood R, Jaya A, Balasubramanian D, Chatni S Indian J Surg Oncol. 2021; 12(1):100-107.

PMID: 33814839 PMC: 7960814. DOI: 10.1007/s13193-020-01216-1.

The prospective evaluation and risk factors of dysphagia after surgery in patients with oral cancer.

Hasegawa T, Yatagai N, Furukawa T, Wakui E, Saito I, Takeda D J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2021; 50(1):4.

PMID: 33494830 PMC: 7830751. DOI: 10.1186/s40463-020-00479-6.

References

Rastadmehr O, Bressmann T, Smyth R, Irish J . Increased midsagittal tongue velocity as indication of articulatory compensation in patients with lateral partial glossectomies. Head Neck. 2008; 30(6):718-26. DOI: 10.1002/hed.20772. View

Hosemann W, Gode U, Dunker J, Eysholdt U . Influence of endoscopic sinus surgery on voice quality. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 1999; 255(10):499-503. DOI: 10.1007/s004050050107. View

Sharp P, Kelly S, Main A, Manley G . An instrument for the multiparameter assessment of speech. Med Eng Phys. 2000; 21(9):661-71. DOI: 10.1016/s1350-4533(99)00091-0. View

Archontaki M, Athanasiou A, Stavrianos S, Korkolis D, Faratzis G, Papadopoulou F . Functional results of speech and swallowing after oral microvascular free flap reconstruction. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2010; 267(11):1771-7. DOI: 10.1007/s00405-010-1275-2. View

Michiwaki Y, Schmelzeisen R, Hacki T, Michi K . Articulatory function in glossectomized patients with immediate reconstruction using a free jejunum flap. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1992; 20(5):203-10. DOI: 10.1016/s1010-5182(05)80316-6. View

Mlynarek A, Rieger J, Harris J, OConnell D, Al-Qahtani K, Ansari K . Methods of functional outcomes assessment following treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancer: review of the literature. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008; 37(1):2-10. View

Mady K, Sader R, Hoole P, Zimmermann A, Horch H . Speech evaluation and swallowing ability after intra-oral cancer. Clin Linguist Phon. 2003; 17(4-5):411-20. DOI: 10.1080/0269920031000079921. View

Furia C, Kowalski L, Latorre M, Angelis E, Martins N, Barros A . Speech intelligibility after glossectomy and speech rehabilitation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001; 127(7):877-83. View

Pauloski B, Rademaker A, Logemann J, Colangelo L . Speech and swallowing in irradiated and nonirradiated postsurgical oral cancer patients. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1998; 118(5):616-24. DOI: 10.1177/019459989811800509. View

10.

Schuster M, Maier A, Bocklet T, Nkenke E, Holst A, Eysholdt U . Automatically evaluated degree of intelligibility of children with different cleft type from preschool and elementary school measured by automatic speech recognition. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2012; 76(3):362-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2011.12.010. View

11.

de Carvalho-Teles V, Sennes L, Gielow I . Speech evaluation after palatal augmentation in patients undergoing glossectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008; 134(10):1066-70. DOI: 10.1001/archotol.134.10.1066. View

12.

Nicoletti G, Soutar D, Jackson M, Wrench A, Robertson G, Robertson C . Objective assessment of speech after surgical treatment for oral cancer: experience from 196 selected cases. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004; 113(1):114-25. DOI: 10.1097/01.PRS.0000095937.45812.84. View

13.

Wuyts F, De Bodt M, Molenberghs G, Remacle M, Heylen L, Millet B . The dysphonia severity index: an objective measure of vocal quality based on a multiparameter approach. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2000; 43(3):796-809. DOI: 10.1044/jslhr.4303.796. View

14.

Whitehill T, Ciocca V, Chan J, Samman N . Acoustic analysis of vowels following glossectomy. Clin Linguist Phon. 2006; 20(2-3):135-40. DOI: 10.1080/02699200400026694. View

15.

Maier A, Honig F, Bocklet T, Noth E, Stelzle F, Nkenke E . Automatic detection of articulation disorders in children with cleft lip and palate. J Acoust Soc Am. 2009; 126(5):2589-602. DOI: 10.1121/1.3216913. View

16.

Bosman L, Fabert J, Pruyn J, de Boer M, van den Borne H, de Jong P . Judging speech communication effectiveness in oral cancer patients. J Commun Disord. 1991; 24(1):40-50. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9924(91)90032-e. View

17.

Schuster M, Maier A, Haderlein T, Nkenke E, Wohlleben U, Rosanowski F . Evaluation of speech intelligibility for children with cleft lip and palate by means of automatic speech recognition. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2006; 70(10):1741-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2006.05.016. View

18.

Borggreven P, Verdonck-de Leeuw I, Muller M, Heiligers M, de Bree R, Aaronson N . Quality of life and functional status in patients with cancer of the oral cavity and oropharynx: pretreatment values of a prospective study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2007; 264(6):651-7. PMC: 1914238. DOI: 10.1007/s00405-007-0249-5. View

19.

Zimmermann A, Sader R, Hoole P, Bressmann T, Mady K, Horch H . The influence of oral cavity tumour treatment on the voice quality and on fundamental frequency. Clin Linguist Phon. 2003; 17(4-5):273-81. DOI: 10.1080/0269920031000080073. View

20.

Engel H, Huang J, Lin C, Lam W, Kao H, Gazyakan E . A strategic approach for tongue reconstruction to achieve predictable and improved functional and aesthetic outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010; 126(6):1967-1977. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181f44742. View