Accuracy of Acoustic Measures of Voice Via Telepractice Videoconferencing Platforms

Overview

Journal J Speech Lang Hear Res

Date 2021 Jun 22

PMID 34157251

Citations 7

Authors

Hasini R Weerathunge

Roxanne K Segina

Lauren Tracy

Cara E Stepp

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose Telepractice improves patient access to clinical care for voice disorders. Acoustic assessment has the potential to provide critical, objective information during telepractice, yet its validity via telepractice is currently unknown. The current study investigated the accuracy of acoustic measures of voice in a variety of telepractice platforms. Method Twenty-nine voice samples from individuals with dysphonia were transmitted over six video conferencing platforms (Zoom with and without enhancements, Cisco WebEx, Microsoft Teams, Doxy.me, and VSee Messenger). Standard time-, spectral-, and cepstral-based acoustic measures were calculated. The effect of transmission condition on each acoustic measure was assessed using repeated-measures analyses of variance. For those acoustic measures for which transmission condition was a significant factor, linear regression analysis was performed on the difference between the original recording and each telepractice platform, with the overall severity of dysphonia, Internet speed, and ambient noise from the transmitter as predictors. Results Transmission condition was a statistically significant factor for all acoustic measures except for mean fundamental frequency ( ). Ambient noise from the transmitter was a significant predictor of differences between platforms and the original recordings for all acoustic measures except measures. All telepractice platforms affected acoustic measures in a statistically significantly manner, although the effects of platforms varied by measure. Conclusions Overall, measures of were the least impacted by telepractice transmission. Microsoft Teams had the least and Zoom (with enhancements) had the most pronounced effects on acoustic measures. These results provide valuable insight into the relative validity of acoustic measures of voice when collected via telepractice. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.14794812.

Citing Articles

Exploring the Accessibility of Community-Based Telerehabilitation for Children with Disabilities from Low-Income Households.

Sagun K, Alava R, Cablay K, Dagdag K, Lagman F, Nocos K Int J Telerehabil. 2025; 16(2):e6625.

PMID: 39927078 PMC: 11804857. DOI: 10.5195/ijt.2024.6625.

Investigating the Impact of Speech Compression on the Acoustics of Dysarthric Speech.

Tran K, Xu L, Stegmann G, Liss J, Berisha V, Utianski R Interspeech. 2024; 2022:2263-2267.

PMID: 39493500 PMC: 11529786. DOI: 10.21437/interspeech.2022-10817.

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis-Bulbar Dysfunction Index-Remote: Test-Retest and Interrater Reliability of Candidate Items.

Bouvier L, Green J, Tapia C, Tilton-Bolowsky V, Maffei M, Fless Z Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2023; 32(4S):1884-1900.

PMID: 37494887 PMC: 10561957. DOI: 10.1044/2023_AJSLP-22-00177.

Addressing disparities in speech-language pathology and laryngology services with telehealth.

Rameau A, Cox S, Sussman S, Odigie E J Commun Disord. 2023; 105:106349.

PMID: 37321106 PMC: 10239150. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2023.106349.

Remote versus face-to-face neuropsychological testing for dementia research: a comparative study in people with Alzheimer's disease, frontotemporal dementia and healthy older individuals.

Requena-Komuro M, Jiang J, Dobson L, Benhamou E, Russell L, Bond R BMJ Open. 2022; 12(11):e064576.

PMID: 36428012 PMC: 9702828. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064576.

References

Mashima P, Doarn C . Overview of telehealth activities in speech-language pathology. Telemed J E Health. 2009; 14(10):1101-17. DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2008.0080. View

Molini-Avejonas D, Rondon-Melo S, Amato C, Samelli A . A systematic review of the use of telehealth in speech, language and hearing sciences. J Telemed Telecare. 2015; 21(7):367-76. DOI: 10.1177/1357633X15583215. View

Keck C, Doarn C . Telehealth technology applications in speech-language pathology. Telemed J E Health. 2014; 20(7):653-9. DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2013.0295. View

Mashima P, Brown J . Remote management of voice and swallowing disorders. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2011; 44(6):1305-16, viii. DOI: 10.1016/j.otc.2011.08.007. View

Burk M, Wiley T . Continuous versus pulsed tones in audiometry. Am J Audiol. 2004; 13(1):54-61. DOI: 10.1044/1059-0889(2004/008). View

Ramig L, Verdolini K . Treatment efficacy: voice disorders. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1998; 41(1):S101-16. DOI: 10.1044/jslhr.4101.s101. View

Hillenbrand J, CLEVELAND R, Erickson R . Acoustic correlates of breathy vocal quality. J Speech Hear Res. 1994; 37(4):769-78. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3704.769. View

Mehta D, Hillman R . Voice assessment: updates on perceptual, acoustic, aerodynamic, and endoscopic imaging methods. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008; 16(3):211-5. PMC: 3775647. DOI: 10.1097/MOO.0b013e3282fe96ce. View

Towey M . Speech Therapy Telepractice for Vocal Cord Dysfunction (VCD): MaineCare (Medicaid) Cost Savings. Int J Telerehabil. 2015; 4(1):33-6. PMC: 4296819. DOI: 10.5195/ijt.2012.6095. View

10.

Patel R, Awan S, Barkmeier-Kraemer J, Courey M, Deliyski D, Eadie T . Recommended Protocols for Instrumental Assessment of Voice: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Expert Panel to Develop a Protocol for Instrumental Assessment of Vocal Function. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018; 27(3):887-905. DOI: 10.1044/2018_AJSLP-17-0009. View

11.

Maryn Y, Weenink D . Objective dysphonia measures in the program Praat: smoothed cepstral peak prominence and acoustic voice quality index. J Voice. 2014; 29(1):35-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.06.015. View

12.

Grillo E . Results of a Survey Offering Clinical Insights into Speech-Language Pathology Telepractice Methods. Int J Telerehabil. 2017; 9(2):25-30. PMC: 5716613. DOI: 10.5195/ijt.2017.6230. View

13.

Fu S, Theodoros D, Ward E . Delivery of Intensive Voice Therapy for Vocal Fold Nodules Via Telepractice: A Pilot Feasibility and Efficacy Study. J Voice. 2015; 29(6):696-706. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.12.003. View

14.

Klatt D, Klatt L . Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. J Acoust Soc Am. 1990; 87(2):820-57. DOI: 10.1121/1.398894. View

15.

Marsano-Cornejo M, Roco-Videla A, Capona-Corbalan D, Silva-Harthey C . Variation of the acoustic parameter harmonic-to-noise ratio in relation to different background noise levels. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp (Engl Ed). 2020; 72(3):177-181. DOI: 10.1016/j.otorri.2020.04.007. View

16.

McKenna V, Stepp C . The relationship between acoustical and perceptual measures of vocal effort. J Acoust Soc Am. 2018; 144(3):1643. PMC: 6167228. DOI: 10.1121/1.5055234. View

17.

Mashima P, Birkmire-Peters D, Syms M, Holtel M, Burgess L, Peters L . Telehealth: voice therapy using telecommunications technology. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2003; 12(4):432-9. DOI: 10.1044/1058-0360(2003/089). View

18.

Franic D, Bramlett R, Bothe A . Psychometric evaluation of disease specific quality of life instruments in voice disorders. J Voice. 2005; 19(2):300-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2004.03.003. View

19.

Stepp C, Hillman R, Heaton J . The impact of vocal hyperfunction on relative fundamental frequency during voicing offset and onset. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2010; 53(5):1220-6. DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0234). View

20.

Xue S, Lower A . Acoustic fidelity of internet bandwidths for measures used in speech and voice disorders. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010; 128(3):1366-76. DOI: 10.1121/1.3467764. View