Original Study

Differentiating between adductor and abductor spasmodic dysphonia using airflow interruption

  1. Matthew R. Hoffman BS,
  2. Jack J. Jiang MD, PhD*,
  3. Adam L. Rieves BS,
  4. Kelsey A. B. McElveen BS,
  5. Charles N. Ford MD

Article first published online: 24 JUN 2009

DOI: 10.1002/lary.20572

Issue

The Laryngoscope

The Laryngoscope

Volume 119, Issue 9, pages 1851–1855, September 2009

Additional Information

How to Cite

Hoffman, M. R., Jiang, J. J., Rieves, A. L., McElveen, K. A. B. and Ford, C. N. (2009), Differentiating between adductor and abductor spasmodic dysphonia using airflow interruption. The Laryngoscope, 119: 1851–1855. doi: 10.1002/lary.20572

Author Information

  1. Department of Surgery, Division of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A.

*1300 University Ave., 5745 Medical Sciences Center, Madison, WI 53706

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 27 AUG 2009
  2. Article first published online: 24 JUN 2009
  3. Manuscript Accepted: 6 MAY 2009

Funded by

  • NIH. Grant Number: R01 DC008153
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (145K)

Keywords:

  • Spasmodic dysphonia;
  • laryngeal resistance;
  • airflow interruption;
  • mean flow rate;
  • subglottal pressure

Abstract

Objectives/Hypothesis:

To measure the laryngeal resistance (RL), subglottal pressure (Ps), and mean flow rate (MFR) of adductor (ADSD) and abductor (ABSD) spasmodic dysphonia patients using the airflow interrupter.

Methods:

The RL of six ABSD and seven ADSD patients was measured using the airflow interrupter, a noninvasive device designed to measure MFR and Ps via mechanical balloon valve interruption. Subjects performed 10 trials at each of two intensity levels, with each trial consisting of a sustained /a/ during which phonation was interrupted for 500 ms. Laryngeal resistance was calculated as subglottal pressure divided by airflow.

Results:

Mean RL for the ADSD and ABSD subtypes at 65 dB were 24.78 cmH2O/L/s and 14.51 cmH2O/L/s, respectively (P = .04). Mean RL at 70 dB were 40.02 cmH2O/L/s and 15.84 cmH2O/L/s (P = .014). Ps for the ADSD and ABSD subtypes at 65 dB were 10.23 cmH2O and 8.32 cmH2O, respectively (P = .582). At the 70 dB level, Ps were 12.39 cmH2O and 11.78 cmH2O (P = .886). MFR for the ADSD and ABSD subtypes at 65 dB were 435 mL/s and 746 mL/s (P = .205). Mean MFR at 70 dB were 518 mL/s and 848 mL/s (P = .198).

Conclusions:

Noninvasive measurements of RL may be useful for differentiating between ADSD and ABSD. This simple objective test, which produces a quantitative output, could be used to evaluate laryngeal function in patients with spasmodic dysphonia. Laryngoscope, 2009

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (145K)