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
. 2020 Apr;130(4):E177-E182.
doi: 10.1002/lary.28148. Epub 2019 Jun 20.

Measuring the impact of dysphonia on quality of life using health state preferences

Matthew R Naunheim  1   2 , Leanne Goldberg  3 , Jennifer B Dai  3 , Benjamin J Rubinstein  3 , Mark S Courey  3
Affiliations

Measuring the impact of dysphonia on quality of life using health state preferences

Matthew R Naunheim et al. Laryngoscope. 2020 Apr.

Abstract

Objectives: Formal evaluation of health states related to dysphonia have not been rigorously evaluated in affected patients. The objective of this project was to evaluate the health states of mild, moderate, and severe dysphonia using formal health state preference evaluation, and to compare these outcomes with the degree of voice handicap.

Design: Prospective health state preference assessment.

Methods: A convenience sample of patients presenting with voice complaints were enrolled from an academic voice center. Demographic and voice handicap index (VHI-10) data were obtained, and an assessment of preference for five health states (monocular blindness, binocular blindness, mild dysphonia, moderate dysphonia, and severe dysphonia) was performed. Utility scores were calculated on a scale from 0 (death) to 1 (perfect health). Analysis was performed with ANOVA testing with post-hoc comparisons and correlation statistics.

Results: Of 209 assessments, 149 (75.6%) met quality criteria. Relative to monocular blindness (score 0.61 [CI 0.57-0.64]), moderate dysphonia (0.58 [0.54-0.62]) was rated equivalently, with severe dysphonia (0.33 [0.29-0.37]) ranking significantly worse and mild dysphonia (0.96 [0.95-0.98]) significantly better. Binocular blindness (0.18 [0.15-0.21]) was the worst-ranked health state. There was a weak inverse correlation of VHI-10 with dysphonia-related preference scores; with worsening reported voice handicap, scores decreased.

Conclusion: This study demonstrated that dysphonia had a significant impact of quality of life, with moderate dysphonia ranking equivalently with monocular blindness. These numerical estimates may be used for ongoing research into the value and cost-effectiveness of medical, therapeutic, and surgical interventions for voice disorders.

Level of evidence: 2c (outcomes research) Laryngoscope, 130:E177-E182, 2020.

Keywords: Dysphonia; health state utilities; hoarseness; patient preference; valuation; voice.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

    1. Wilson J, Deary I, Millar A, Mackenzie K. The quality of life impact of dysphonia. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2002;27:179-182.
    1. Hogikyan ND, Sethuraman G. Validation of an instrument to measure voice-related quality of life (V-RQOL). J Voice 1999;13:557-569.
    1. Branski RC, Cukier-Blaj S, Pusic A, et al. Measuring quality of life in dysphonic patients: a systematic review of content development in patient-reported outcomes measures. J Voice 2010;24:193-198.
    1. Rosen CA, Lee AS, Osborne J, Zullo T, Murry T. Development and validation of the voice handicap index-10. Laryngoscope 2004;114:1549-1556.
    1. Cohen SM, Statham M, Rosen CA, Zullo T. Development and validation of the Singing Voice Handicap-10. Laryngoscope 2009;119:1864-1869.

LinkOut - more resources