SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2020 / Cilt: 50 - Sayı: 4

Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Vocal Fatigue Index

Seher ŞİRİN
Mehmet Fatih ÖĞÜT
Cem BİLGEN
Pages
902–909
Publication Date
2020-08-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The V-RQOL scores decreased significantly as the VFI scores increased. 3Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey Received: 20.08.2019 Accepted/Published Online: 16.05.2020 Final Version: 23.06.2020 Conclusion: The Turkish version of the VFI is a good reliable Turkish-speaking community.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background/aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Vocal Fatigue Index VFI .
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and methods: The study was conducted with 535 participants including 285 patients with voice disorders and 250 healthy controls.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The V-RQOL scores decreased significantly as the VFI scores increased. 3Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey Received: 20.08.2019 Accepted/Published Online: 16.05.2020 Final Version: 23.06.2020 Conclusion: The Turkish version of the VFI is a good reliable Turkish-speaking community.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2019 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Voice · vocal fatigue · reliability

Abstract

Background/aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Vocal Fatigue Index VFI . Materials and methods: The study was conducted with 535 participants including 285 patients with voice disorders and 250 healthy controls. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were calculated for the reliability analysis. The mean VFI factor scores of both groups were compared. The strength and direction of the relation between VFI and Voice-Related Quality of Life V-RQOL measure was evaluated for the validity analysis. Results: The Cronbach's alpha coefficient of VFI factor scores was found to be 0.920 for tiredness and avoidance of voice use, 0.879 for physical discomfort with voice use, and 0.882 for improvement of symptoms with voice rest. The test-retest reliability revealed 0.877 for the tiredness and avoidance of voice use, 0.913 for the physical discomfort with voice use, and 0.820 for the improvement of symptoms with voice rest. When compared with healthy individuals, VFI factor scores were statistically significant higher in patients with voice disorders. The V-RQOL scores decreased significantly as the VFI scores increased. 3Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, İzmir, Turkey Received: 20.08.2019 Accepted/Published Online: 16.05.2020 Final Version: 23.06.2020 Conclusion: The Turkish version of the VFI is a good reliable Turkish-speaking community.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞİRİN, S., ÖĞÜT, M. F., BİLGEN, C. (2020). Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Vocal Fatigue Index. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 50 - Sayı: 4, 902–909. https://ajindex.com/articles/113181

References (4)

  1. Hamdan AL, Sataloff RT, Hawkshaw MJ. Sleep, body fatigue, and voice. In: Hamdan AL, Sataloff RT, Hawkshaw MJ (editors). Laryngeal Manifestations of Systemic Diseases. San Diego, CA, USA: Plural Publishing; 2019. pp. 83-86
  2. Solomon, NP. Vocal fatigue and its relation to vocal hyperfunction. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 2008; 10 (4): 254-266. doi: 10.1080/14417040701730990 3. Koufman JA, Blalock PD. Functional voice disorders. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America 1991; 24 (5): 1059- 1073
  3. Koufman JA, Blalock PD. Vocal fatigue and dysphonia in the professional voice user: Bogart-bacall syndrome. Laryngoscope 1988; 98 (5): 493-498. doi: 10.1288/00005537-198805000- 00003 5. Stemple JC, Stanley J, Lee L. Objective measures of voice production in normal subjects following prolonged voice use. Journal of Voice 1995; 9 (2): 127-133. doi: 10.1016/s0892- 1997(05)80245-0 6. Gotaas C, Starr CD. Vocal fatigue among teachers. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica 1993; 45 (3): 120-129. doi: 10.1159/000266237 7. Welham NV, Maclagan MA. Vocal fatigue: current knowledge and future directions. Journal of Voice 2003; 17 (1): 21-30. doi: 10.1016/s0892-1997(03)00033-x 8. Kostyk BE, Rochet AP. Laryngeal airway resistance in teachers with vocal fatigue: a preliminary study. Journal of Voice 1998; 12 (3): 287-299. doi: 10.1016/s0892-1997(98)80019-2 9. Moore JE, Hu A. The voice history. In: Sataloff RT, Benninger MS (editors). Sataloff ’s Comprehensive Textbook of Otolaryngology: Head & Neck Surgery: Laryngology (Vol. 6). Philadelphia, PA, USA: Jaypee Medical Inc.; 2016. pp.119-129
  4. Branski CR, Cukier-Blaj S, Pusic A, Cano JS, Klassen A et al. Measuring quality of life in dysphonic patients: a systematic review of content development in patient-reported outcomes measures. Journal of Voice 2010; 24 (2): 193-198. doi: 10.1016/j. jvoice.2008.05.006 11. Nanjundeswaran C, Jacobson BH, Gartner-Schmidt J, Verdolini Abbott K. Vocal Fatigue Index (VFI): Development and Validation. Journal of Voice 2015; 29 (4): 433-440. doi: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.09.012 12. Aaronson N, Alonso J, Burnham A, Lohr NK, Patrick DL et al. (Scientific Advisory Committee of Medical Outcomes Trust). Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Quality of Life Research 2002; 11 (3): 193-205. doi: 10.1023/a:1015291021312 13. Naderifar E, Moradi N, Farzadi F, Tahmasebi N, Soltani M et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the vocal