Outcomes of Vocal Hygiene Program in Facilitating Vocal Health in Female School Teachers With Voice Problems

Background. Teachers suffer greater impacts of voice problems due inappropriate voice use and other contributing factors such as physiological, environmental, and individual & work related issues. Structured vocal hygiene programs (VHP) prevent/reduce the risk of vocal trauma and promote vocal health in teachers. This study aimed to estimate the outcome of instituting a sociocultural relevant vocal hygiene program in facilitating vocal health among female school teachers using a comprehensive voice assessment protocol. Method. VHP was developed emphasizing adequate hydration, healthy vocal diet, posture and alignment, vocal practices while teaching, and ideal speaking environment. This was administered via a face to face session to seventeen female teachers with voice concerns. All underwent a comprehensive voice assessment (subjective, objective, and self-perceptual vocal measures) before and four weeks after the VHP. Inter-rater reliability for perceptual and visual examination was estimated using Intra-Class Coefficient. Wilcoxon signed ranks test was used to compare the pre- and post-treatment measures of continuous variables (acoustic, Maximum phonation time, s/z ratio, Vocal Fatigue Index [VFI] & Voice Disorder Outcome Profile [V-DOP]), and McNemar test was used for categorical variables (vocal health questionnaire, visual examination of larynx and perceptual evaluation of voice). Results. Teachers reported reduction of unhealthy vocal & nonvocal practices after VHP. Improvements in vocal and related symptoms such as sensation of heart burn (P = 0.031), discomfort around the throat (P = 0.008), inadequate breath control while speaking (P = 0.016) were noticed. Perceptually, minimal improvement was seen in voice quality (overall grade). However, MPT & s/z ratio showed no significant difference. Improvement was observed in frequency range (P = 0.004), low I-0 (P = 0.044), shimmer (P = 0.017), and DSI (P = 0.013). Changes were evident in all parameters of stroboscopic evaluation (except nonvibratory portion & ventricular fold hyper-adduction). V-DOP scores indicated positive change in the overall severity (P = 0.002), physical (P = 0.003) and functional domain (P = 0.034). VFI indicated improvement in teachers voice after a period of voice rest (P = 0.048). Conclusion. Though VHP facilitated in improving the teachers' awareness of at risk phono-traumatic behaviors and vocal health, its efficiency was limited in producing physiological improvement in teachers' voice. The comparison of vocal metrics before & after the treatment provides information on changes that can be expected in teachers after guiding them through a systematic VHP.