Comparison of Labial and Mechanical Interruption for Measurement of Aerodynamic Parameters
To directly compare the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (P s), mean flow rate (MFR), and laryngeal resistance (R L). Thirty-four subjects performed 10 trials with both mechanical and labial interruption. P s and MFR were recorded, whereas R L was calcul...
Saved in:
| Published in | Journal of voice Vol. 25; no. 3; pp. 337 - 341 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors | , , , |
| Format | Journal Article |
| Language | English |
| Published |
United States
Mosby, Inc
01.05.2011
Elsevier Science Ltd |
| Subjects | |
| Online Access | Get full text |
| ISSN | 0892-1997 1873-4588 1873-4588 1557-8658 |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004 |
Cover
| Abstract | To directly compare the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (P
s), mean flow rate (MFR), and laryngeal resistance (R
L).
Thirty-four subjects performed 10 trials with both mechanical and labial interruption. P
s and MFR were recorded, whereas R
L was calculated by dividing P
s by MFR. Coefficients of variation were calculated to compare intrasubject precision. A subset of 10 subjects performed the tasks twice with 30 minutes between sessions. Bland-Altman plots were used to determine intrasubject repeatability for each of the methods.
Mechanical interruption produced coefficients of variation for P
s, MFR, and R
L of 0.0995, 0.127, and 0.129, respectively. Labial interruption produced coefficients of variation of 0.102, 0.147, and 0.169, respectively.
P values were 0.824 for P
s, 0.159 for MFR, and 0.043 for R
L. The Bland-Altman plots revealed comparable repeatability between the two methods. The 95% confidence intervals of the Bland-Altman plots for mechanical interruption were (−0.050, 0.072), (−0.543, 1.832), and (−2.498, 10.528) for MFR, P
s, and R
L. Confidence intervals for labial interruption were (−0.018, 0.031), (0.057, 2.442), and (−3.267, 10.595) for MFR, P
s, and R
L.
Mechanical interruption produced higher precision when measuring R
L because of more reliable airflow measurements. Mechanical and labial interruption showed comparable repeatability. Further research into using mechanical interruption clinically is warranted. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | A study is presented which directly compares the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (Ps), mean flow rate (MFR), and laryngeal resistance (RL). Thirty-four subjects performed 10 trials with both mechanical and labial interruption. Ps and MFR were recorded, whereas RL was calculated by dividing Ps by MFR. Coefficients of variation were calculated to compare intrasubject precision. A subset of 10 subjects performed the tasks twice with 30 minutes between sessions. Bland-Altman plots were used to determine intrasubject repeatability for each of the methods. Mechanical interruption produced coefficients of variation for Ps, MFR, and RL of 0.0995, 0.127, and 0.129, respectively. Labial interruption produced coefficients of variation of 0.102, 0.147, and 0.169, respectively. P values were 0.824 for Ps, 0.159 for MFR, and 0.043 for RL. The Bland-Altman plots revealed comparable repeatability between the two methods. The 95% confidence intervals of the Bland-Altman plots for mechanical interruption were (-0.050, 0.072), (-0.543, 1.832), and (-2.498, 10.528) for MFR, Ps, and RL. Confidence intervals for labial interruption were (-0.018, 0.031), (0.057, 2.442), and (-3.267, 10.595) for MFR, Ps, and RL. Mechanical interruption produced higher precision when measuring RL because of more reliable airflow measurements. Mechanical and labial interruption showed comparable repeatability. Further research into using mechanical interruption clinically is warranted. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT] To directly compare the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (P(s)), mean flow rate (MFR), and laryngeal resistance (R(L)).OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESISTo directly compare the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (P(s)), mean flow rate (MFR), and laryngeal resistance (R(L)).Thirty-four subjects performed 10 trials with both mechanical and labial interruption. P(s) and MFR were recorded, whereas R(L) was calculated by dividing P(s) by MFR. Coefficients of variation were calculated to compare intrasubject precision. A subset of 10 subjects performed the tasks twice with 30 minutes between sessions. Bland-Altman plots were used to determine intrasubject repeatability for each of the methods.METHODSThirty-four subjects performed 10 trials with both mechanical and labial interruption. P(s) and MFR were recorded, whereas R(L) was calculated by dividing P(s) by MFR. Coefficients of variation were calculated to compare intrasubject precision. A subset of 10 subjects performed the tasks twice with 30 minutes between sessions. Bland-Altman plots were used to determine intrasubject repeatability for each of the methods.Mechanical interruption produced coefficients of variation for P(s), MFR, and R(L) of 0.0995, 0.127, and 0.129, respectively. Labial interruption produced coefficients of variation of 0.102, 0.147, and 0.169, respectively. P values were 0.824 for P(s), 0.159 for MFR, and 0.043 for R(L). The Bland-Altman plots revealed comparable repeatability between the two methods. The 95% confidence intervals of the Bland-Altman plots for mechanical interruption were (-0.050, 0.072), (-0.543, 1.832), and (-2.498, 10.528) for MFR, P(s), and R(L). Confidence intervals for labial interruption were (-0.018, 0.031), (0.057, 2.442), and (-3.267, 10.595) for MFR, P(s,) and R(L).RESULTSMechanical interruption produced coefficients of variation for P(s), MFR, and R(L) of 0.0995, 0.127, and 0.129, respectively. Labial interruption produced coefficients of variation of 0.102, 0.147, and 0.169, respectively. P values were 0.824 for P(s), 0.159 for MFR, and 0.043 for R(L). The Bland-Altman plots revealed comparable repeatability between the two methods. The 95% confidence intervals of the Bland-Altman plots for mechanical interruption were (-0.050, 0.072), (-0.543, 1.832), and (-2.498, 10.528) for MFR, P(s), and R(L). Confidence intervals for labial interruption were (-0.018, 0.031), (0.057, 2.442), and (-3.267, 10.595) for MFR, P(s,) and R(L).Mechanical interruption produced higher precision when measuring R(L) because of more reliable airflow measurements. Mechanical and labial interruption showed comparable repeatability. Further research into using mechanical interruption clinically is warranted.CONCLUSIONSMechanical interruption produced higher precision when measuring R(L) because of more reliable airflow measurements. Mechanical and labial interruption showed comparable repeatability. Further research into using mechanical interruption clinically is warranted. Objectives/Hypothesis: To directly compare the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (Ps), mean flow rate (MFR), and laryngeal resistance (RL). Methods: Thirty-four subjects performed 10 trials with both mechanical and labial interruption. Ps and MFR were recorded, whereas RL was calculated by dividing Ps by MFR. Coefficients of variation were calculated to compare intrasubject precision. A subset of 10 subjects performed the tasks twice with 30 minutes between sessions. Bland-Altman plots were used to determine intrasubject repeatability for each of the methods. Results: Mechanical interruption produced coefficients of variation for Ps, MFR, and RL of 0.0995, 0.127, and 0.129, respectively. Labial interruption produced coefficients of variation of 0.102, 0.147, and 0.169, respectively. P values were 0.824 for Ps, 0.159 for MFR, and 0.043 for RL. The Bland-Altman plots revealed comparable repeatability between the two methods. The 95% confidence intervals of the Bland-Altman plots for mechanical interruption were (-0.050, 0.072), (-0.543, 1.832), and (-2.498, 10.528) for MFR, Ps, and RL. Confidence intervals for labial interruption were (-0.018, 0.031), (0.057, 2.442), and (-3.267, 10.595) for MFR, Ps, and RL. Conclusions: Mechanical interruption produced higher precision when measuring RL because of more reliable airflow measurements. Mechanical and labial interruption showed comparable repeatability. Further research into using mechanical interruption clinically is warranted. Adapted from the source document To directly compare the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (P(s)), mean flow rate (MFR), and laryngeal resistance (R(L)). Thirty-four subjects performed 10 trials with both mechanical and labial interruption. P(s) and MFR were recorded, whereas R(L) was calculated by dividing P(s) by MFR. Coefficients of variation were calculated to compare intrasubject precision. A subset of 10 subjects performed the tasks twice with 30 minutes between sessions. Bland-Altman plots were used to determine intrasubject repeatability for each of the methods. Mechanical interruption produced coefficients of variation for P(s), MFR, and R(L) of 0.0995, 0.127, and 0.129, respectively. Labial interruption produced coefficients of variation of 0.102, 0.147, and 0.169, respectively. P values were 0.824 for P(s), 0.159 for MFR, and 0.043 for R(L). The Bland-Altman plots revealed comparable repeatability between the two methods. The 95% confidence intervals of the Bland-Altman plots for mechanical interruption were (-0.050, 0.072), (-0.543, 1.832), and (-2.498, 10.528) for MFR, P(s), and R(L). Confidence intervals for labial interruption were (-0.018, 0.031), (0.057, 2.442), and (-3.267, 10.595) for MFR, P(s,) and R(L). Mechanical interruption produced higher precision when measuring R(L) because of more reliable airflow measurements. Mechanical and labial interruption showed comparable repeatability. Further research into using mechanical interruption clinically is warranted. To directly compare the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (P s), mean flow rate (MFR), and laryngeal resistance (R L). Thirty-four subjects performed 10 trials with both mechanical and labial interruption. P s and MFR were recorded, whereas R L was calculated by dividing P s by MFR. Coefficients of variation were calculated to compare intrasubject precision. A subset of 10 subjects performed the tasks twice with 30 minutes between sessions. Bland-Altman plots were used to determine intrasubject repeatability for each of the methods. Mechanical interruption produced coefficients of variation for P s, MFR, and R L of 0.0995, 0.127, and 0.129, respectively. Labial interruption produced coefficients of variation of 0.102, 0.147, and 0.169, respectively. P values were 0.824 for P s, 0.159 for MFR, and 0.043 for R L. The Bland-Altman plots revealed comparable repeatability between the two methods. The 95% confidence intervals of the Bland-Altman plots for mechanical interruption were (−0.050, 0.072), (−0.543, 1.832), and (−2.498, 10.528) for MFR, P s, and R L. Confidence intervals for labial interruption were (−0.018, 0.031), (0.057, 2.442), and (−3.267, 10.595) for MFR, P s, and R L. Mechanical interruption produced higher precision when measuring R L because of more reliable airflow measurements. Mechanical and labial interruption showed comparable repeatability. Further research into using mechanical interruption clinically is warranted. Summary Objectives/Hypothesis To directly compare the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (Ps ), mean flow rate (MFR), and laryngeal resistance (RL ). Methods Thirty-four subjects performed 10 trials with both mechanical and labial interruption. Ps and MFR were recorded, whereas RL was calculated by dividing Ps by MFR. Coefficients of variation were calculated to compare intrasubject precision. A subset of 10 subjects performed the tasks twice with 30 minutes between sessions. Bland-Altman plots were used to determine intrasubject repeatability for each of the methods. Results Mechanical interruption produced coefficients of variation for Ps , MFR, and RL of 0.0995, 0.127, and 0.129, respectively. Labial interruption produced coefficients of variation of 0.102, 0.147, and 0.169, respectively. P values were 0.824 for Ps , 0.159 for MFR, and 0.043 for RL . The Bland-Altman plots revealed comparable repeatability between the two methods. The 95% confidence intervals of the Bland-Altman plots for mechanical interruption were (−0.050, 0.072), (−0.543, 1.832), and (−2.498, 10.528) for MFR, Ps , and RL . Confidence intervals for labial interruption were (−0.018, 0.031), (0.057, 2.442), and (−3.267, 10.595) for MFR, Ps, and RL. Conclusions Mechanical interruption produced higher precision when measuring RL because of more reliable airflow measurements. Mechanical and labial interruption showed comparable repeatability. Further research into using mechanical interruption clinically is warranted. |
| Author | Hoffman, Matthew R. Chapin, William J. Jiang, Jack J. Rieves, Adam L. |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: William J. surname: Chapin fullname: Chapin, William J. – sequence: 2 givenname: Matthew R. surname: Hoffman fullname: Hoffman, Matthew R. – sequence: 3 givenname: Adam L. surname: Rieves fullname: Rieves, Adam L. – sequence: 4 givenname: Jack J. surname: Jiang fullname: Jiang, Jack J. email: jiang@surgery.wisc.edu |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20189755$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNqVkt-K1DAUxoOsuLOrbyAy4IXezJikSduICMvgn4VZFNQrL0ImOXUztsmYtAPzNj6LT-apM-ufBV0sgZLm-349Oec7IUchBiDkPqNzRln5ZD1fb6O3MOcUP1E2p1TcIhNWV8VMyLo-IhNaKz5jSlXH5CTnNaWU4-kdcoyWWlVSTsjHRew2JvkcwzQ206VZedNOTXDTC7CXJniL2_PQQ0rDpveoamL69vUCTB4SdBD60XYGKbpdMJ2307cmmQ7QkO-S241pM9w7vE_Jh5cv3i9ez5ZvXp0vzpYzK2vZzwrbVGAZdw2ngnIrKlBARcUaZaVzBRfONU3JnXGVhdIYx4VcKboSVhYSTHFKnu-5m2HVgbNYVDKt3iTfmbTT0Xj950nwl_pT3GquaM2URMCjAyDFLwPkXnc-W2hbEyAOWdelqGrJWI3Kx_9UMlpg04XiCqUPr0nXcUgBG4EqxooaV4GqB7_X_rPoqwmh4OleYFPMOUGjre_NOAm8im-RNeJKvdb7OIxOqinTGAc0i2vmK_4NtkNDAae29ZB0th6CBecT2F676P8XYFv_I0ufYQf5VyN05prqd2NQx5wyOj6yRMCzvwNu_v93ju38XQ |
| CODEN | JOVOEA |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1002_lary_27418 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jvoice_2019_02_005 crossref_primary_10_1044_2020_JSLHR_20_00501 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jvoice_2020_02_024 |
| Cites_doi | 10.1007/s004050000299 10.1177/000348940411300404 10.1016/S0892-1997(99)80012-5 10.1097/00005537-199903000-00016 10.1097/mlg.0b013e318063e89e 10.1016/j.jvoice.2007.09.005 10.1177/000348948509400107 10.1044/jshr.2901.71 10.1002/lary.20572 10.1177/000348940911800208 10.1007/BF02477320 10.1044/jshd.4602.138 10.1177/000348940511400403 10.1121/1.388046 10.1177/000348949210100706 10.1044/jshr.0701.17 10.1121/1.2772230 10.1159/000263213 10.1016/j.jvoice.2008.03.005 10.1016/S0892-1997(05)80248-6 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | 2011 The Voice Foundation The Voice Foundation Copyright © 2011 The Voice Foundation. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved. |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: 2011 The Voice Foundation – notice: The Voice Foundation – notice: Copyright © 2011 The Voice Foundation. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved. |
| DBID | AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7T9 8BM NAPCQ 7X8 5PM |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004 |
| DatabaseName | CrossRef Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA) ComDisDome Nursing & Allied Health Premium MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) |
| DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) Nursing & Allied Health Premium Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA) ComDisDome MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | Nursing & Allied Health Premium MEDLINE - Academic Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA) MEDLINE |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine Anatomy & Physiology |
| EISSN | 1873-4588 1557-8658 |
| EndPage | 341 |
| ExternalDocumentID | PMC2908195 20189755 10_1016_j_jvoice_2010_01_004 S0892199710000056 1_s2_0_S0892199710000056 |
| Genre | Journal Article Comparative Study Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
| GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders grantid: R01 DC008153 – fundername: NIDCD NIH HHS grantid: R01 DC008153 |
| GroupedDBID | --- --K --M -RU -~X .1- .FO .GJ .~1 0R~ 186 1B1 1P~ 1RT 1~. 1~5 29L 4.4 457 4G. 53G 5RE 5VS 6PF 7-5 71M 85S 8P~ 9JM 9JO AAEDT AAEDW AAFJI AAIKJ AAKOC AALRI AAOAW AAQFI AAQXK AATTM AAWTL AAXKI AAXUO AAYWO ABBQC ABFNM ABFRF ABIVO ABJNI ABMAC ABMMH ABMZM ABWVN ABXDB ACDAQ ACGFO ACGFS ACIEU ACLOT ACRLP ACRPL ACVFH ADBBV ADCNI ADEZE ADMHG ADMUD ADNMO AEBSH AEFWE AEIPS AEKER AENEX AETEA AEUPX AEVXI AFFDN AFFNX AFJKZ AFPUW AFRHN AFTJW AFXIZ AGHFR AGQPQ AGUBO AGYEJ AHHHB AIEXJ AIGII AIIUN AIKHN AITUG AJRQY AJUYK AKBMS AKRWK AKYEP ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMRAJ ANKPU ANZVX AOMHK APXCP ASPBG AVARZ AVWKF AXJTR AZFZN BKOJK BLXMC BNPGV BPHCQ BVXVI CS3 DU5 EBS EFJIC EFKBS EFLBG EJD EO8 EO9 EP2 EP3 F5P FDB FEDTE FGOYB FIRID FNPLU FYGXN G-2 G-Q GBLVA HEA HMK HMO HVGLF HZ~ H~9 IAO ICO IEA IER IHE IHR INH INR IOF IPO ITC J1W J5H KNOGT KOM LZ2 M27 M41 MO0 N9A O-L O9- OAUVE OG- OHT OR0 OZT P-8 P-9 P2P PC. PQQKQ PRBVW PROAC Q38 R2- ROL RPZ SAE SDF SDG SEL SES SEW SPCBC SSB SSH SSO SSZ T5K TAE TN5 TWZ UHS UKR UNMZH UPT WH7 WUQ YQT Z5R ZCG ZY4 ~G- ~HD 3V. A3D AACTN ABTAH AFCTW AFKWA AJOXV AJPXE AMFUW AVQMV BENPR DJMCT PKN RIG VQA AAIAV ABLVK ABYKQ AEVYS AJBFU AKYCK LCYCR AAYXX CITATION AGCQF AGRNS CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7T9 8BM NAPCQ 7X8 5PM |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c585t-3cf7ec12df20402c47e9e0471f9c5dd324ddff62dad7ce6aad245b90b4c535ea3 |
| IEDL.DBID | .~1 |
| ISSN | 0892-1997 1873-4588 |
| IngestDate | Tue Sep 30 15:35:48 EDT 2025 Sat Sep 27 22:42:24 EDT 2025 Thu Oct 02 13:14:32 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 25 05:09:11 EDT 2025 Sat May 31 02:10:32 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 24 23:00:29 EDT 2025 Wed Oct 01 02:09:49 EDT 2025 Fri Feb 23 02:22:55 EST 2024 Sun Feb 23 10:20:15 EST 2025 Tue Oct 14 19:29:22 EDT 2025 |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 3 |
| Keywords | Subglottal pressure Laryngeal resistance Labial interruption Laryngeal airflow Mechanical interruption |
| Language | English |
| License | https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0 Copyright © 2011 The Voice Foundation. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c585t-3cf7ec12df20402c47e9e0471f9c5dd324ddff62dad7ce6aad245b90b4c535ea3 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 14 ObjectType-Article-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 Please send reprint requests to Jack J. Jiang, M.D., Ph.D. |
| PMID | 20189755 |
| PQID | 1011381383 |
| PQPubID | 2038076 |
| PageCount | 5 |
| ParticipantIDs | pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2908195 proquest_miscellaneous_864785118 proquest_miscellaneous_1030894929 proquest_journals_1011381383 pubmed_primary_20189755 crossref_citationtrail_10_1016_j_jvoice_2010_01_004 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jvoice_2010_01_004 elsevier_sciencedirect_doi_10_1016_j_jvoice_2010_01_004 elsevier_clinicalkeyesjournals_1_s2_0_S0892199710000056 elsevier_clinicalkey_doi_10_1016_j_jvoice_2010_01_004 |
| ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2011-05-01 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2011-05-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 05 year: 2011 text: 2011-05-01 day: 01 |
| PublicationDecade | 2010 |
| PublicationPlace | United States |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States – name: New York |
| PublicationTitle | Journal of voice |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | J Voice |
| PublicationYear | 2011 |
| Publisher | Mosby, Inc Elsevier Science Ltd |
| Publisher_xml | – name: Mosby, Inc – name: Elsevier Science Ltd |
| References | Tanaka, Gould (bib3) 1985; 94 Jiang, Stern, Chen, Solomon (bib2) 2004; 113 Löfqvist, Carlborg, Kitzing (bib8) 1982; 72 Dejonckere, Bradley, Clemente (bib1) 2001; 258 Hoffman, Jiang (bib14) 2009; 23 Baggott, Yuen, Hoffman, Jiang (bib17) 2007; 117 Bard, Slavit, McCaffrey, Lipton (bib10) 1992; 101 Kearney, Poletto, Mann, Ludlow (bib13) 2005; 114 Hoffman, Jiang, Rieves, McElveen, Ford (bib15) 2009; 119 Smitheran, Hixon (bib7) 1981; 46 Rieves, Hoffman, Jiang (bib16) 2009; 118 Stathopoulos (bib18) 1986; 29 Alipour, Scherer (bib20) 2007; 122 Koike, Perkins (bib6) 1968; 20 Isshiki (bib4) 1964; 128 Hertegård, Gauffin, Lindestad (bib9) 1995; 9 Jiang, O'Mara, Conley, Hanson (bib11) 1999; 109 Kitzing, Löfqvist (bib5) 1975; 13 Jiang, O'Mara, Chen, Stern, Vlagos, Hanson (bib19) 1999; 13 Hoffman, Baggott, Jiang (bib12) 2009; 23 Isshiki (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib4) 1964; 128 Koike (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib6) 1968; 20 Rieves (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib16) 2009; 118 Kearney (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib13) 2005; 114 Hoffman (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib14) 2009; 23 Kitzing (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib5) 1975; 13 Hoffman (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib12) 2009; 23 Alipour (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib20) 2007; 122 Jiang (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib19) 1999; 13 Hoffman (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib15) 2009; 119 Dejonckere (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib1) 2001; 258 Jiang (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib2) 2004; 113 Tanaka (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib3) 1985; 94 Löfqvist (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib8) 1982; 72 Stathopoulos (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib18) 1986; 29 Hertegård (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib9) 1995; 9 Jiang (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib11) 1999; 109 Baggott (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib17) 2007; 117 Smitheran (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib7) 1981; 46 Bard (10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib10) 1992; 101 |
| References_xml | – volume: 13 start-page: 644 year: 1975 end-page: 648 ident: bib5 article-title: Subglottal and oral air pressures during phonation-preliminary investigation using a miniature transducer system publication-title: Med Biol Eng – volume: 20 start-page: 360 year: 1968 end-page: 368 ident: bib6 article-title: Application of miniaturized pressure transducer for experimental speech research publication-title: Folia Phoniatr (Basel) – volume: 117 start-page: 1491 year: 2007 end-page: 1495 ident: bib17 article-title: Estimating subglottal pressure via airflow redirection publication-title: Laryngoscope – volume: 9 start-page: 149 year: 1995 end-page: 155 ident: bib9 article-title: A comparison of subglottal and intraoral pressure measurements during phonation publication-title: J Voice – volume: 72 start-page: 633 year: 1982 end-page: 635 ident: bib8 article-title: Initial validation of an indirect measure of subglottal pressure during vowels publication-title: J Acoust Soc Am – volume: 114 start-page: 264 year: 2005 end-page: 270 ident: bib13 article-title: Suppression of thyroarytenoid muscle responses during repeated air pressure stimulation of the laryngeal mucosa in awake humans publication-title: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol – volume: 128 start-page: 17 year: 1964 end-page: 29 ident: bib4 article-title: Regulatory mechanism of voice intensity variation publication-title: J Speech Hear Res – volume: 13 start-page: 583 year: 1999 end-page: 591 ident: bib19 article-title: Aerodynamic measurements of patients with Parkinson's disease publication-title: J Voice – volume: 101 start-page: 578 year: 1992 end-page: 582 ident: bib10 article-title: Noninvasive technique for estimating subglottic pressure and laryngeal efficiency publication-title: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol – volume: 113 start-page: 277 year: 2004 end-page: 282 ident: bib2 article-title: Vocal efficiency measurements in subjects with vocal polyps and nodules: a preliminary report publication-title: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol – volume: 258 start-page: 77 year: 2001 end-page: 82 ident: bib1 article-title: A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques. Guideline elaborated by the Committee on Phoniatrics of the European Laryngological Society (ELS) publication-title: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol – volume: 122 start-page: 2296 year: 2007 end-page: 2305 ident: bib20 article-title: On pressure-frequency relations in the excised larynx publication-title: J Acoust Soc Am – volume: 118 start-page: 124 year: 2009 end-page: 130 ident: bib16 article-title: Estimation of laryngeal resistance via airflow redirection publication-title: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol – volume: 46 start-page: 138 year: 1981 end-page: 146 ident: bib7 article-title: A clinical method for estimating laryngeal airway resistance during vowel production publication-title: J Speech Hear Disord – volume: 109 start-page: 425 year: 1999 end-page: 432 ident: bib11 article-title: Phonation threshold pressure measurements during phonation by airflow interruption publication-title: Laryngoscope – volume: 23 start-page: 169 year: 2009 end-page: 174 ident: bib12 article-title: Reliable time to estimate subglottal pressure publication-title: J Voice – volume: 23 start-page: 653 year: 2009 end-page: 657 ident: bib14 article-title: Estimating subglottal pressure via airflow interruption with auditory masking publication-title: J Voice – volume: 119 start-page: 1851 year: 2009 end-page: 1855 ident: bib15 article-title: Differentiating between adductor and abductor spasmodic dysphonia using airflow interruption publication-title: Laryngoscope – volume: 94 start-page: 29 year: 1985 end-page: 33 ident: bib3 article-title: Vocal efficiency and aerodynamic aspects in voice disorders publication-title: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol – volume: 29 start-page: 71 year: 1986 end-page: 74 ident: bib18 article-title: Relationship between intraoral air pressure and vocal intensity in children and adults publication-title: J Speech Hear Res – volume: 258 start-page: 77 year: 2001 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib1 publication-title: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol doi: 10.1007/s004050000299 – volume: 113 start-page: 277 year: 2004 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib2 article-title: Vocal efficiency measurements in subjects with vocal polyps and nodules: a preliminary report publication-title: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol doi: 10.1177/000348940411300404 – volume: 13 start-page: 583 year: 1999 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib19 article-title: Aerodynamic measurements of patients with Parkinson's disease publication-title: J Voice doi: 10.1016/S0892-1997(99)80012-5 – volume: 109 start-page: 425 year: 1999 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib11 article-title: Phonation threshold pressure measurements during phonation by airflow interruption publication-title: Laryngoscope doi: 10.1097/00005537-199903000-00016 – volume: 117 start-page: 1491 year: 2007 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib17 article-title: Estimating subglottal pressure via airflow redirection publication-title: Laryngoscope doi: 10.1097/mlg.0b013e318063e89e – volume: 23 start-page: 169 year: 2009 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib12 article-title: Reliable time to estimate subglottal pressure publication-title: J Voice doi: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2007.09.005 – volume: 94 start-page: 29 year: 1985 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib3 article-title: Vocal efficiency and aerodynamic aspects in voice disorders publication-title: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol doi: 10.1177/000348948509400107 – volume: 29 start-page: 71 year: 1986 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib18 article-title: Relationship between intraoral air pressure and vocal intensity in children and adults publication-title: J Speech Hear Res doi: 10.1044/jshr.2901.71 – volume: 119 start-page: 1851 year: 2009 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib15 article-title: Differentiating between adductor and abductor spasmodic dysphonia using airflow interruption publication-title: Laryngoscope doi: 10.1002/lary.20572 – volume: 118 start-page: 124 year: 2009 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib16 article-title: Estimation of laryngeal resistance via airflow redirection publication-title: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol doi: 10.1177/000348940911800208 – volume: 13 start-page: 644 year: 1975 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib5 article-title: Subglottal and oral air pressures during phonation-preliminary investigation using a miniature transducer system publication-title: Med Biol Eng doi: 10.1007/BF02477320 – volume: 46 start-page: 138 year: 1981 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib7 article-title: A clinical method for estimating laryngeal airway resistance during vowel production publication-title: J Speech Hear Disord doi: 10.1044/jshd.4602.138 – volume: 114 start-page: 264 year: 2005 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib13 article-title: Suppression of thyroarytenoid muscle responses during repeated air pressure stimulation of the laryngeal mucosa in awake humans publication-title: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol doi: 10.1177/000348940511400403 – volume: 72 start-page: 633 year: 1982 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib8 article-title: Initial validation of an indirect measure of subglottal pressure during vowels publication-title: J Acoust Soc Am doi: 10.1121/1.388046 – volume: 101 start-page: 578 year: 1992 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib10 article-title: Noninvasive technique for estimating subglottic pressure and laryngeal efficiency publication-title: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol doi: 10.1177/000348949210100706 – volume: 128 start-page: 17 year: 1964 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib4 article-title: Regulatory mechanism of voice intensity variation publication-title: J Speech Hear Res doi: 10.1044/jshr.0701.17 – volume: 122 start-page: 2296 year: 2007 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib20 article-title: On pressure-frequency relations in the excised larynx publication-title: J Acoust Soc Am doi: 10.1121/1.2772230 – volume: 20 start-page: 360 year: 1968 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib6 article-title: Application of miniaturized pressure transducer for experimental speech research publication-title: Folia Phoniatr (Basel) doi: 10.1159/000263213 – volume: 23 start-page: 653 year: 2009 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib14 article-title: Estimating subglottal pressure via airflow interruption with auditory masking publication-title: J Voice doi: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2008.03.005 – volume: 9 start-page: 149 year: 1995 ident: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004_bib9 article-title: A comparison of subglottal and intraoral pressure measurements during phonation publication-title: J Voice doi: 10.1016/S0892-1997(05)80248-6 |
| SSID | ssj0002873 ssib001128903 |
| Score | 1.9690362 |
| Snippet | To directly compare the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (P
s), mean flow rate (MFR), and laryngeal resistance (R... Summary Objectives/Hypothesis To directly compare the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (Ps ), mean flow rate... To directly compare the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (P(s)), mean flow rate (MFR), and laryngeal resistance... A study is presented which directly compares the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (Ps), mean flow rate (MFR), and... Objectives/Hypothesis: To directly compare the mechanical and labial interruption techniques of measuring subglottal pressure (Ps), mean flow rate (MFR), and... |
| SourceID | pubmedcentral proquest pubmed crossref elsevier |
| SourceType | Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
| StartPage | 337 |
| SubjectTerms | Air Flow Catheterization Comparative Studies Flowmeters Humans Labial interruption Laryngeal airflow Laryngeal resistance Laryngology Larynx - physiology Measurement Mechanical interruption Otolaryngology Otolaryngology - instrumentation Otolaryngology - methods Phonation Pressure Reproducibility of Results Respiration Rheology Speech Acoustics Speech Pathology Subglottal Pressure Time Factors Voice Voice Disorders |
| Title | Comparison of Labial and Mechanical Interruption for Measurement of Aerodynamic Parameters |
| URI | https://www.clinicalkey.com/#!/content/1-s2.0-S0892199710000056 https://www.clinicalkey.es/playcontent/1-s2.0-S0892199710000056 https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.01.004 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20189755 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1011381383 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1030894929 https://www.proquest.com/docview/864785118 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC2908195 |
| Volume | 25 |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVESC databaseName: Baden-Württemberg Complete Freedom Collection (Elsevier) customDbUrl: eissn: 1873-4588 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: true ssIdentifier: ssj0002873 issn: 0892-1997 databaseCode: GBLVA dateStart: 20110101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.sciencedirect.com providerName: Elsevier – providerCode: PRVESC databaseName: Elsevier Freedom Collection customDbUrl: eissn: 1873-4588 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: true ssIdentifier: ssj0002873 issn: 0892-1997 databaseCode: ACRLP dateStart: 19950301 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.sciencedirect.com providerName: Elsevier – providerCode: PRVESC databaseName: Elsevier SD Freedom Collection customDbUrl: eissn: 1873-4588 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: true ssIdentifier: ssj0002873 issn: 0892-1997 databaseCode: .~1 dateStart: 19950101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.sciencedirect.com providerName: Elsevier – providerCode: PRVESC databaseName: Elsevier SD Freedom Collection Journals [SCFCJ] customDbUrl: eissn: 1873-4588 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: true ssIdentifier: ssj0002873 issn: 0892-1997 databaseCode: AIKHN dateStart: 19950301 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.sciencedirect.com providerName: Elsevier – providerCode: PRVLSH databaseName: Elsevier Journals customDbUrl: mediaType: online eissn: 1873-4588 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: true ssIdentifier: ssj0002873 issn: 0892-1997 databaseCode: AKRWK dateStart: 19870101 isFulltext: true providerName: Library Specific Holdings |
| link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1LaxRBEC5CBPEimvgYE0ML4m2yMz3T8zgui2HVbAhqIOCh6ekH2aCzIbsb8OJv8bf4y6zqeWzWRCKeFna6mJ6u6uqvu7-qAnhdRplNLGoA4YLCDUqkwsJVMU48rlUV5aoyPtvnUTY-Sd-fitMNGHWxMESrbH1_49O9t27_GbSjObiYTgefoqLkRJPwJ9S4jlMEe5pTFYP9HyuaB-4I_C0zNvakii58znO8zq9mlLmnIXjF-1Fbru2W5ekm_PyTRXltWTp4BA9bPMmGTZcfw4att2B7WONe-tt39oZ5hqc_Ot-C-5P2In0bvoz6-oNs5tihosARpmrDJpZigUl1zJ8WXi69U2EIbn_9nKxOFElsaNH9NiXt2bEimhfl6nwCJwdvP4_GYVtnIdS4WViEiXa51TE3juOU5jrNbWkjXLVcqYUxCLmMcS7jRplc20wpw1NRlVGVapEIq5KnsFnPavscGCqgcGlulEPckJcO0ZBwScwrrUyWFiqApBteqdsk5FQL46vs2GbnslGKJKXIKJaolADCXuqiScJxR3vRaU52AaboEiWuEnfI5bfJ2Xk7r-cylnMuI3nD9q5LrpnvP7xztzMtuXoNel2EUkmRBPCqf4wTn25zVG1nS2qTYC9ShLcBsL-0KSiSmPaQATxrjLUfP-xCUeZCYM_XzLhvQHnH15_U0zOff5yXhCPFi__-5h140BzNE290FzYXl0v7ErHdotrzk3cP7g1HHw-P6ffdh_HRb5A9Uqg |
| linkProvider | Elsevier |
| linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1bb9MwFD4aQwJeEGxcAgOMhHjLmjh2nDxWFVOBdkJikybxYDm-iE6QTmuLxAu_hd_CL-PYuXRlQ0O8Jrbi-Fz8Hfs7xwCvyiS3mUUJIFxQGKAkKi5claLhUa2qRKjKhGqfh_n4mL074SdbMOpyYTytsvX9jU8P3rp9Mmhnc3A2mw0-JkVJPU0i7FDjOn4DbjJOhY_A9n-seR4YEoRjZmwdWBVd_lwgeZ1-m_vSPQ3DK91P2vvarlifLuPPP2mUF9alg3twtwWUZNiM-T5s2XoHdoc1BtNfv5PXJFA8w975Dtyatifpu_Bp1F9ASOaOTJTPHCGqNmRqfTKwlx0J24Xnq-BVCKLbXz-n6y1F321o0f82d9qTD8rzvHyxzgdwfPDmaDSO24sWYo3RwjLOtBNWp9Q4ijZNNRO2tAkuW67U3BjEXMY4l1OjjNA2V8pQxqsyqZjmGbcqewjb9by2j4EwJgrHhFEOgYMoHcIh7rKUVlqZnBUqgqybXqnbKuT-MowvsqObncpGKNILRSapRKFEEPe9zpoqHNe0553kZJdhij5R4jJxTT9xVT-7aA17IVO5oDKRl5TvYs8N_f2Hb-51qiXXn0G3i1gqK7IIXvav0fL9cY6q7Xzl22Q4Cob4NgLylzaFTyX2QWQEjxpl7ecPh1CUgnMc-YYa9w184fHNN_XscyhATksPJPmT__7nF3B7fDSdyMnbw_dP4U6zT-9JpHuwvTxf2WcI9JbV82DIvwFZYFKo |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison+of+Labial+and+Mechanical+Interruption+for+Measurement+of+Aerodynamic+Parameters&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+voice&rft.au=Chapin%2C+William+J&rft.date=2011-05-01&rft.pub=Elsevier+Science+Ltd&rft.issn=0892-1997&rft.eissn=1873-4588&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=337&rft.epage=341&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.jvoice.2010.01.004&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT |
| thumbnail_m | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/image/custom?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.clinicalkey.com%2Fck-thumbnails%2F08921997%2FS0892199711X00036%2Fcov150h.gif |