Emelia BensonMeyer, Holly Reckers, Evan Kennedy, Carly Schiff, Michael Pitman
There is high consensus regarding which few therapy techniques to employ first, yet participants reported using a wide range of therapeutic techniques throughout the treatment process. There was also a lack of consensus on which specific techniques are most effective. These findings suggest there are multiple tools to choose from, but no objective mode to evaluate which will be best for a specific patient beyond trial and error. This suggests the need for better diagnostics to align patients' symptoms with certain treatment tools that will be more effective for the specific patient, and to better understand the benefits and nuances of each tool.
OBJECTIVES: This study serves as an investigation into the treatment approaches of speech-language pathologists who work with patients diagnosed with vocal fold paresis. This study tests the hypotheses that: 1) there is a wide range of practice patterns among speech-language pathologists when treating vocal fold paresis; 2) there is low consensus among speech-language pathologists regarding the most effective therapeutic techniques for vocal fold paresis; and 3) a variety of these techniques are employed with limited perceived confidence in their efficacy.
METHODS: A questionnaire consisting of 18 multiple-choice and open-text questions was developed using the Qualtrics platform. Questions included information on participants' confidence in treating vocal fold paresis, treatment frequency, and which therapeutic techniques they regularly employ. A total of 46 participants completed the survey. Participants were recruited via professional social media groups and word of mouth.
RESULTS: Participants' treatment techniques were wide-ranging, but certain exercises were consistently chosen, including SOVTs and resonant voice therapy. Less than 20% of participants reported feeling that their treatment is extremely effective, though a majority reported feeling confident in their treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: There is high consensus regarding which few therapy techniques to employ first, yet participants reported using a wide range of therapeutic techniques throughout the treatment process. There was also a lack of consensus on which specific techniques are most effective. These findings suggest there are multiple tools to choose from, but no objective mode to evaluate which will be best for a specific patient beyond trial and error. This suggests the need for better diagnostics to align patients' symptoms with certain treatment tools that will be more effective for the specific patient, and to better understand the benefits and nuances of each tool.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V.