Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Der Acoustic Voice Quality Index in Deutsch

Ein Messverfahren zur allgemeinen Stimmqualität

The Acoustic Voice Quality Index

Toward expanded measurement of dysphonia severity in German subjects

  • Originalien
  • Published:
HNO Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Der Zweck dieser Studie war herauszufinden, inwieweit der Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI) auch sprachübergreifend stabil bleibt, wenn die fortlaufende Sprache beim AVQI vom Niederländischen ins Deutsche verändert wird, um dann ggf. die bestehende Normierung für den deutschen Sprachraum anzupassen.

Patienten und Methoden

Für diese Studie wurden 61 deutsche Probanden mit unterschiedlichen Heiserkeitsgraden untersucht. Der Heiserkeitsgrad der 61 Stimmsignale, bestehend aus der Kombination von fortlaufender Sprache und einem gehaltenem Vokal [a], wurde letztlich von insgesamt 5 erfahrenen Logopäden beurteilt und mit denen der AVQI-Analyse verglichen.

Ergebnisse

Es konnte eine ähnlich hohe Korrelation (rs = 0,79) zwischen AVQI und dem auditiv-perzeptiven Heiserkeitsgrad bestätigt werden sowie auch ähnlich hohe Differen-zierungsverhältnisse zwischen gesunden und dysphonen Stimmen („area under curve“, AUC = 0,888). Alle diese Ergebnisse bestätigen auch vorherige Studien mit dem AVQI. Ein deutscher AVQI-Cutoff-Score von 2,70 hat eine Sensitivität von 79% und eine Spezifität von 92%. Er weicht minimal von den Resultaten der vorherigen Studie im Niederländischen ab: AVQI-Cutoff-Score bei 2,95.

Fazit

Für die allgemeine Stimmqualität ist der AVQI auch im Deutschen ein gutes Diagnostikmittel.

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study was first to explore the cross-linguistic robustness of the Acoustic Voice Quality Index (i.e., AVQI) when administered to German continuous speech segments instead of Dutch sentences. The second aim was to define a normative AVQI threshold for distinguishing between normophonia and dysphonia in German speakers.

Methods

Sixty-one German subjects with diverse voice disorders were asked to sustain the vowel [a] and to read aloud a common text. A 3-s mid-vowel segment and the first two sentences of the text “The northwind and the sun” were edited, concatenated and analyzed according to methods described elsewhere. The voice recordings from all 61 participants were (1) auditory-perceptually rated with ‘H’ from the RBH system by five experienced clinicians and (2) acoustically analyzed to yield the AVQI scores.

Results

First, a reasonable correlation was found between the AVQI and H (i.e., rs = 0.79). Second, the AVQI revealed an acceptable diagnostic differentiation between normal and dysphonic voices (i.e., AUC = 0.888). These results on German material accord with the results from previous studies on Dutch material. Furthermore, in the German version, the AVQI’s cutoff score of 2.70 is accompanied by sensitivity = 79% and specificity = 92%. This indicates minimal normative deviation from the AVQI’s cutoff score of 2.95 in Dutch.

Conclusion

The present and the previous studies yielded almost identical results, denoting the AVQI’s cross-linguistic robustness and its feasibility to clinically measure voice quality in German.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4

Literatur

  1. ANSI (1960) USA standard acoustical terminology. American National Standards Institute, New York

  2. Awan SN, Lawson LL (2009) The effect of anchor modality on the reliability of vocal severity ratings. J Voice 23:341–352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Boersma P, Weenink D (o J) Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer. [computer program]. (Version 5.1.30). Institute of Phonetic Sciences, Amsterdam. http://www.praat.org. Zugegriffen: Feb 2011

  4. Chan KM, Yiu EM (2002) The effect of anchors and training on the reliability of perceptual voice evaluation. J Speech Lang Hear Res 45:111–126

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. De Bodt M, Wuyts FL, Van de Heyning PH, Croux C (1997) Test-retest study of the GRBAS scale: influence of experience and professional background on perceptual rating of voice quality. J Voice 11:74–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Eadie TL, Smith MK (2011) The effect of listener experience and anchors on judgments of dysphonia. J Speech Lang Hear Res 54:430–447

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fröhlich M, Michaelis D, Strube HW, Kruse E (2000) Acoustic voice analysis by means of the hoarseness diagram. J Speech Lang Hear Res 43:706–720

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hillenbrand J (o J) SpeechTool. [computer program], Version 1.65. http://homepages.wmich.edu/~hillenbr/. Zugegriffen: Feb 2011

  9. Lessing J (2007) Entwicklung einer Klassifikationsmethode zur akustischen Analyse fortlaufender Sprache unterschiedlicher Stimmgüte mittels Neuronaler Netze und deren Anwendung. Dissertation, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen

  10. Madazio G, Leão S, Behlau M (2011) The phonatory deviation diagram: a novel objective measurement of vocal function. Folia Phoniatr Logop 63:305–311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Maryn Y (2010) Acoustic measurement of overall voice quality in sustained vowels and continuous speech. Dissertation, Ghent Universiteit, Belgien

  12. Maryn Y, Corthals P, Van Cauwenberge P et al (2010a) Toward improved ecological validity in the acoustic measurement of overall voice quality: combining continuous speech and sustained vowels. J Voice 24:540–555

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Maryn Y, De Bodt M, Roy N (2010b) The acoustic voice quality index: toward improved treatment outcomes assessment in voice disorders. J Commun Disord 43:161–174

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Nawka T, Anders LC (1996) Die auditive Bewertung heiserer Stimmen nach dem RBH- System. Thieme, Stuttgart

  15. Nawka T, Evans R (2006) RBH – Training und Diagnostik – Auditiv-perzeptive Heiserkeitsbewertung. Wevos, Forchheim

  16. Pabon P (2007) Manual voice profiler Version 4.0. http://www.let.uu.nl/~peter.pabon/personal/OtherActivities/VoiceProfiler/ManualVPjan07.pdf. Zugegriffen: Okt 2010

  17. Perkins W (1971) Vocal function: a behavioral analysis. vocal function: assessment and therapy. In: Travis LE (Hrsg) Handbook of speech pathology and audiology. Appleton Century Crofts, New York

  18. Portney LG, Watkins MP (2000) Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice, 2. Aufl. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliff/NJ, USA

  19. Preacher KJ (2010) Calculation for the test of the difference between two independent correlation coefficients. http://people.ku.edu/~preacher/corrtest/corrtest.htm. Zugegriffen: Mai 2011

  20. Ptok M, Schwemmle C, Iven C et al (2005) Zur auditiven Bewertung der Stimmqualität. HNO 54:793–802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Titze IR (1994) Principles of voice production. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliff/NJ, USA

  22. Zraick RI, Wendel K, Smith-Olinde L (2005) The effect of speaking task on perceptual judgment of the severity of dysphonic voice. J Voice 19:574–581

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt für sich und seine Koautoren an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. -, Am Alten Sportplatz 8a, 41472, Neuss, Deutschland

    B. Barsties BHth

  2. Department of Speech - Language Therapy, Zuyd University, Heerlen, Niederlande

    B. Barsties BHth

  3. Department of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, Sint-Jan General Hospital, Ruddershove 10, 8000, Brügge, Belgien

    Y. Maryn BSc, MSc, PhD

Authors
  1. B. Barsties BHth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Y. Maryn BSc, MSc, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to B. Barsties BHth or Y. Maryn BSc, MSc, PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Barsties, B., Maryn, Y. Der Acoustic Voice Quality Index in Deutsch. HNO 60, 715–720 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00106-012-2499-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00106-012-2499-9

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation