Cargando…

Tele-rehabilitation in voice disorders during the pandemic: a consensus paper from the French Society of Phoniatrics and Laryngology

OBJECTIVES: To establish a consensus protocol for telerehabilitation in speech therapy for voice disorders. METHODS: The study was conducted according to a modified Delphi method. Twenty speech therapist or laryngologist experts of the French Society of Phoniatrics and Laryngology assessed 24 statem...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Baudouin, Robin, Hans, Stephane, Guiche, Marion, Binet, Anais, Circiu, Marta P., Crevier-Buchman, Lise, Morsomme, Dominique, Finck, Camille, Rutigliano, Paola, Rodriguez, Alexandra, Louvet, Nina-Sophie, Allouche, Johan, Julien-Laferriere, Aude, Vialatte de Pemille, Gregoire, Bousard, Laura, de Mones, Erwan, Crestani, Sabine, Giovanni, Antoine, Gallant, Nadine, Lechien, Jérôme R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9756705/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36525078
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-022-07779-9
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: To establish a consensus protocol for telerehabilitation in speech therapy for voice disorders. METHODS: The study was conducted according to a modified Delphi method. Twenty speech therapist or laryngologist experts of the French Society of Phoniatrics and Laryngology assessed 24 statements of voice telerehabilitation with a 10-point visual analog scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree). The statements were accepted if more than 80% of the experts rated the item with a score of ≥ 8/10. The statements with ≥ 8/10 score by 60–80% of experts were improved and resubmitted to voting until they were validated or rejected. RESULTS: The French Society of Phoniatrics and Laryngology experts validated 10, 6, and 2 statements after the first, second and third voting round, respectively. Seven statements did not reach agreement threshold and were rejected. The validated statements included recommendations for setting (N = 4), medical/speech history (N = 2), subjective voice evaluations (N = 3), objective voice quality measurements (N = 3), and voice rehabilitation (N = 5). The experts agreed for a follow-up consisting of combined telerehabilitation and in-office rehabilitation. The final protocol may be applied in context of pandemic but could be assessed out of pandemic period for patients located in rural regions. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi study established the first telerehabilitation protocol of the French Society of Phoniatrics and Laryngology for patients with voice disorders. Future controlled studies are needed to assess its feasibility, reliability, and the patient perception about telerehabilitation versus in-office rehabilitation.