[The role of sex in voice restoration and emotional functioning after laryngectomy]. / Die Rolle des Geschlechts bei stimmlicher Rehabilitation und emotionalem Befinden nach Laryngektomie.

BACKGROUND: Data on psychosocial factors of laryngectomized women is rare. All means of alaryngeal voice production sound male due to low fundamental frequency and roughness, which makes postlaryngectomy voice rehabilitation especially challenging to women. Aim of this study was to investigate whether women use alaryngeal speech more seldomly and therefore are more emotionally distressed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a cross-sectional multi-centred study 12 female and 138 male laryngectomees were interviewed. To identify risc factors on seldom use of alaryngeal speech and emotional functioning, logistic regression was used and odds ratios were adjusted to age, time since laryngectomy, physical functioning, social activity and feelings of stigmatization. RESULTS: Esophageal speech was used by 83% of the female and 57% of the male patients, prosthetic speech was used by 17% of the female and 20% of the male patients and electrolaryngeal speech was used by 17% of the female and 29% of the male patients. There was a higher risk for laryngectomees to be more emotionally distressed when feeling physically bad (OR=2,48; p=0,02) or having feelings of stigmatization (OR=3,94; p≤0,00). Besides more women tended to be socially active than men (83% vs. 54%; p=0,05). CONCLUSIONS: There was no influence of sex neither on use of alaryngeal speech nor on emotional functioning. Since there is evidence for a different psychosocial adjustment in laryngectomized men and women, more investigation including bigger sample sizes will be needed on this special issue.

[Relevance of psychosocial factors in speech rehabilitation after laryngectomy]. / Bedeutung psychosozialer Faktoren bei der Stimmrehabilitation nach Laryngektomie.

BACKGROUND: Often it is assumed that psychosocial and sociodemographic factors cause the success of voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy. Aim of this study was to analyze the association between these parameters. METHODS: Based on tumor registries of six ENT-clinics all patients were surveyed, who were laryngectomized in the years before (N = 190). Success of voice rehabilitation has been assessed as speech intelligibility measured with the postlaryngectomy-telephone-intelligibility-test. For the assessment of the psychosocial parameters validated and standardized instruments were used if possible. Statistical analysis was done by multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Low speech intelligibility is associated with reduced conversations (OR 0.970) and social activity (OR 1.049). Patients are more likely to talk with esophageal voice when their motivation for learning the new voice was high (OR 7.835) and when they assessed their speech therapist as important for their motivation (OR 4.794). The risk to communicate merely by whispering is higher when patients live together with a partner (OR 5.293), when they talk seldomly (OR 1.017) and when they are not very active in social contexts (OR 0.966). CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial factors can only partly explain how voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy becomes a success. Speech intelligibility is associated with active communication behaviour, whereas the use of an esophageal voice is correlated with motivation. It seems that the gaining of tracheoesophageal puncture voice is independent of psychosocial factors.

[Quality of life and voice intelligibility in laryngeal cancer patients--relevance of the "satisfaction paradox"]. / Lebensqualität und Sprachverständlichkeit bei Patienten mit Kehlkopfkarzinom--Relevanz des "Zufriedenheitsparadoxes".

BACKGROUND: Aim of this study was to compare postoperative quality of life and voice intelligibility of laryngeal cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two studies assessed the quality of life (by EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-H&N35) and the voice intelligibility (by PLTT and FPAL) of 218 laryngectomized and 151 partially resected patients. The data of 86 patients was analysed on the basis of matched pairs (matching criteria: sex and tumour stage). RESULTS: The smelling and tasting of the laryngectomized patients were more affected. Other domains of quality of life did not differ significantly between the groups. The subjective assessment of voice intelligibility led to worse results among the patients with partial laryngectomy, although the objective test proved the contrary. CONCLUSIONS: Subjective and objective assessment of quality of life can differ, which led to paradox results in this study, especially for voice intelligibility. This might be due to the fact that partially resected patients have higher expectations of their operation.

[Use of adaptive devices by laryngectomees]. / Nutzung ausgewählter Hilfsmittel durch Laryngektomierte.

AIMS: This study is directed at the following questions: How many laryngectomees are using which adaptive devices how often? Which devices are they lacking? Which alaryngeal voice has the best results in terms of intelligibility? METHODS: 218 patients operated on in 6 ENT-clinics in Eastern Germany over the last 25 years were interviewed in person. Items from a German questionnaire for psychosocial adjustment after laryngectomy (FPAL) and from the quality of life questionnaire EORTC QLQ-H&N35 were used. Voice intelligibility was measured by an objective test, the Postlaryngectomy-Telephone-Intelligibility-Test (PLTT). RESULTS: The most common communication method in this group is the esophageal voice, only 20% use voice prostheses regularly, and 15% of the patients use electronic devices. 87% of the laryngectomees wear scarves to protect their stoma, and 82% use inhalers. Several patients lack tools for communication, some for protection of the tracheostoma and others devices for showering and swimming. The best speech results are gained with voice prostheses. Health related Quality of Life shows only poor correlation with the use of adaptive devices. CONCLUSION: In general the health care for laryngectomees in terms of device use can be seen as relatively good but not as optimal. Problematic is the fact that 15.5% of the patients could not acquire an adequate voice, that some devices are missed by patients despite the fact that they are available for purchase, and that some patients do not care for their tracheostoma. It could be useful to consider these findings within medical consultations.