ABSTRACT
Presentations to audiences are often seen as challenging by university students, causing physiological reactivity on cortisol levels and heart rate, for example. Many students perceive that they have difficulties expressing themselves or do not consider themselves to be good communicators. With the thought that efficient communication is able to bring well-being and more confidence, it is understood that a communication skills training could mitigate adverse effects on the body during public speaking. This study aimed to verify whether a communicational improvement training can improve physiological parameters and perception when speaking in public among university students. This was a prospective, blinded, controlled, and randomized trial. Students from colleges and universities were recruited for this study. Invitations were either in person or via social networks and/or e-mail. There were 39 university students who completed the tasks, ages between 18 and 30. There were two groups: the intervention group (IG) and control group (CG). The intervention group participated in a communicational improvement program for six weeks to work on breathing, articulation, speech rhythm, pneumophonoarticulatory coordination, expressiveness and non-verbal communication. Data of heart rate measures, salivary cortisol analysis, self-perception of public speaking, and presentation ratings were collected. The intervention group presented with lower heart rates and cortisol levels, better presentation ratings, and higher self-perception of public speaking than the control group after participating in the communication improvement training. In this study it was possible to verify the efficiency of a communicational improvement training, being able to improve cortisol levels, heart rate, and perception when speaking in public in university students. Based on the results presented, new studies are suggested: (a) measuring the individual effect of the workshops demonstrated here and (b) comparing this type of intervention with other types of treatment used in the health area (medication, psychotherapeutic, holistic, etc.).
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Vocal fatigue is a clinical manifestation associated with a perception of negative vocal adjustment. It is related to the increase in the sensation of excessive effort when speaking and the lack of conditioning of the muscles and structures that involve vocal production. Because it has a complex and multifactorial diagnosis, there is still no consensus on the symptoms most commonly found in this clinical condition. OBJECTIVE: To review and analyze the symptoms that characterize the clinical condition of vocal fatigue. METHODS: This study consists of a scoping review carried out in the Cochrane Library, Embase, Lilacs, and Medline databases. Observational studies or clinical trials from the last 10 years. Studies with participants younger than 18 years of age were excluded; as well as research that did not describe symptoms of vocal fatigue or that presented vocal fatigue as a symptom; studies with patients with neurological, psychiatric, syndromic conditions, or head and neck cancer. The Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies NHLBI-NIH scale was used to assess the methodological quality of selected observational studies and the PEDro scale for the analysis of experimental studies. The steps were performed by three blinded evaluators. Subsequently, meta-analyses of global means were executed for each factor under study; a comparison of the difference in the mean score for each factor between exposed and unexposed; a comparison of the difference in the average score, among non-professional voice users, for each factor between exposed and unexposed. RESULTS: In the searches performed, 956 articles were found and 29 articles were selected according to the eligibility criteria. Of these, 93.11% of the studies were observational and 6.89% were clinical trials. Regarding the gender and age group of the study samples, women aged between 30 and 45 years were predominant. As for the occupational use of voice, 68.97% of the samples were composed of professional voice users and 31.03% of non-professional voice users, with most professional voice users being teachers and non-professional voice users, individuals with dysphonia or vocal complaint. To assess vocal fatigue symptoms, 28 studies used the Vocal Fatigue Index (VFI) protocol, and only one study used another assessment protocol, Self-Administered Voice Rating. All studies were classified as regular, according to the scale used. As for the meta-analyses performed, the mean scores of the VFI factors were higher among professional voice users when compared to non-professional voice users and higher in dysphonic individuals compared to non-dysphonic individuals. CONCLUSION: The vocal fatigue symptoms found in this review were common in the populations of professional voice users and non-professional voice users and dysphonic and non-dysphonic individuals. These symptoms were related to vocal recovery after rest, physical discomfort, and restricted vocal use.
