Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1999 Feb;125(2):167-73.
doi: 10.1001/archotol.125.2.167.

Multi-institutional assessment of the Provox 2 voice prosthesis

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Multi-institutional assessment of the Provox 2 voice prosthesis

A H Ackerstaff et al. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1999 Feb.

Abstract

Objectives: To verify the initial results of a new anterograde replacement method of the second-generation indwelling Provox voice prosthesis, Provox 2 (Atos Medical AB, Hörby, Sweden), and to determine its device life.

Design: Nonrandomized, multi-institutional, controlled clinical trial.

Setting: Four academic hospitals and/or comprehensive cancer centers in The Netherlands.

Patients: Two hundred thirty-nine consecutive patients who had undergone laryngectomy and were visiting the outpatient clinic for replacement of their voice prosthesis.

Intervention: Anterograde replacement of the Provox 2 voice prosthesis.

Main outcome measures: Evaluation of ease of use by the medical professional and appreciation by the patients, by means of structured questionnaires; comparison of device life between the original Provox and the new Provox 2 voice prosthesis in a subset of patients.

Results: Voice prostheses replaced were Provox (n = 188), Groningen (Medin, Groningen, The Netherlands) (n = 47), and Nijdam (Medin) (n = 4). Anterograde replacement of Provox 2 was always possible. The new anterograde method was preferred by the medical professionals in 97.1% of cases and by 93.7% of the patients, who reported significantly reduced discomfort (P<.001). There was no significant difference in device life between Provox and Provox 2 (median, 125.5 and 104 days, respectively). In 57.5% of patients, the Provox 2 device life was shorter and in 42.5% it was longer (sign test, P = .09).

Conclusions: The results of the initial study concerning ease of use for the medical professionals and decreased discomfort for the patients of the new anterograde replacement procedure of the Provox 2 prosthesis were confirmed. The device life of Provox and that of Provox 2 were comparable, despite the alterations needed to optimize the Provox 2 prosthesis for the anterograde procedure.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources