Do patients regret having in-office vocal fold injections for glottic insufficiency?

Humans Male Aged Female Vocal Cords Case-Control Studies Larynx Injections Treatment Outcome Retrospective Studies
Decision regret scale Patient reported outcomes Vocal fold injections Vocal fold paralysis Voice handicap index

Journal

Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale
ISSN: 1916-0216
Titre abrégé: J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101479544

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
25 Apr 2023
Historique:
received: 25 08 2021
accepted: 15 04 2023
medline: 27 4 2023
pubmed: 26 4 2023
entrez: 25 4 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

In-office vocal fold injections (VFI) are an effective treatment for glottic insufficiency. The primary objective of this study was to assess if patients reported decisional regret after VFI. Secondary objectives included determining if variables were associated with lower decisional regret. Case-control study of patients who underwent in-office VFIs for glottic insufficiency from August 2017 to December 2019 at a tertiary laryngology clinic. Participants completed the validated Decision Regret Scale (DRS). Demographic data, clinician's perceptual analysis with GRBAS (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, Strain), and patient's self-reported Voice Handicap Index-10 (VHI-10) were analyzed. Nonparametric tests as well as univariate and multiple logistics regression were performed. Of patients eligible, 75% (136/182) completed the DRS (mean age 65.4 years (SD 13.9), 58.1% male). Eighty-three (61.0%) reported no decisional regret, thirty-three (24.3%) reported mild decisional regret, and twenty (14.7%) reported moderate to strong decisional regret. Improvement in most recent VHI-10 (Kendall correlation coefficient tau = 0.156, p = 0.029), Grade of voice (tau = 0.236, p value = 0.002) and Breathiness of voice (tau = 0.150, p = 0.044) were associated with lower DRS. Multivariate logistics regression results showed that the change in Grade of voice (OR 9.9, p < 0.01), Roughness (OR 0.2, p < 0.01) and Breathiness (OR 0.2, p < 0.03) were significantly associated with DRS. The majority of patients had no or mild decisional regret after in-office VFI for glottic insufficiency. Both patients who reported less vocal handicap after VFI and clinician-noted improvements in perceptual evaluation of voice after VFI were associated with significantly lower decisional regret.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
In-office vocal fold injections (VFI) are an effective treatment for glottic insufficiency. The primary objective of this study was to assess if patients reported decisional regret after VFI. Secondary objectives included determining if variables were associated with lower decisional regret.
METHODS METHODS
Case-control study of patients who underwent in-office VFIs for glottic insufficiency from August 2017 to December 2019 at a tertiary laryngology clinic. Participants completed the validated Decision Regret Scale (DRS). Demographic data, clinician's perceptual analysis with GRBAS (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, Strain), and patient's self-reported Voice Handicap Index-10 (VHI-10) were analyzed. Nonparametric tests as well as univariate and multiple logistics regression were performed.
RESULTS RESULTS
Of patients eligible, 75% (136/182) completed the DRS (mean age 65.4 years (SD 13.9), 58.1% male). Eighty-three (61.0%) reported no decisional regret, thirty-three (24.3%) reported mild decisional regret, and twenty (14.7%) reported moderate to strong decisional regret. Improvement in most recent VHI-10 (Kendall correlation coefficient tau = 0.156, p = 0.029), Grade of voice (tau = 0.236, p value = 0.002) and Breathiness of voice (tau = 0.150, p = 0.044) were associated with lower DRS. Multivariate logistics regression results showed that the change in Grade of voice (OR 9.9, p < 0.01), Roughness (OR 0.2, p < 0.01) and Breathiness (OR 0.2, p < 0.03) were significantly associated with DRS.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
The majority of patients had no or mild decisional regret after in-office VFI for glottic insufficiency. Both patients who reported less vocal handicap after VFI and clinician-noted improvements in perceptual evaluation of voice after VFI were associated with significantly lower decisional regret.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1186/s40463-023-00643-8 PMID: 37098608 PMC: PMC10129306
pubmed: 37098608
doi: 10.1186/s40463-023-00643-8
pii: 10.1186/s40463-023-00643-8
pmc: PMC10129306
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

33

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s).

Références

J Nurs Manag. 2014 Mar;22(2):177-91
pubmed: 23406447
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2003 Nov;12(4):432-9
pubmed: 14658995
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017 Mar 1;143(3):260-266
pubmed: 27930764
Cancer. 2019 Apr 15;125(8):1281-1289
pubmed: 30645761
Laryngoscope. 2018 Jun;128(6):1419-1424
pubmed: 29219184
J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010 Dec;39(6):688-96
pubmed: 21144365
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017 Feb;156(2):299-304
pubmed: 28116989
Head Neck. 2010 Dec;32(12):1585-91
pubmed: 20222042
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2011 Oct;23(8):518-24
pubmed: 21550217
Laryngoscope. 2010 Feb;120(2):319-25
pubmed: 19998419
Can Fam Physician. 1986 Nov;32:2366-8
pubmed: 21267217
Med Decis Making. 2016 Aug;36(6):777-90
pubmed: 26975351
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2020 Nov;129(11):1063-1070
pubmed: 32484033
Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007 Jun;15(3):153-8
pubmed: 17483682
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 Sep 1;146(9):839-844
pubmed: 32701131
Am J Otolaryngol. 2008 Jan-Feb;29(1):7-12
pubmed: 18061825
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019 Dec 1;145(12):1170-1178
pubmed: 31621812
Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2017 May;134(3):145-149
pubmed: 28007508
Head Neck. 2017 Nov;39(11):2151-2158
pubmed: 28736965
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 Oct;163(4):673-675
pubmed: 32484731
Psychother Psychosom. 2008;77(4):219-26
pubmed: 18418028
Mayo Clin Proc. 1997 Dec;72(12):1116-22
pubmed: 9413290
Acad Radiol. 2020 Mar;27(3):421-427
pubmed: 31272815
Laryngoscope. 2004 Sep;114(9):1549-56
pubmed: 15475780
Med Decis Making. 2003 Jul-Aug;23(4):281-92
pubmed: 12926578
J Appl Psychol. 1977 Dec;62(6):777-80
pubmed: 591490
BMJ. 1999 Sep 18;319(7212):731-4
pubmed: 10487995
N Engl J Med. 1981 Oct 22;305(17):982-7
pubmed: 7278922
Laryngoscope. 2016 Jul;126 Suppl 5:S5-S13
pubmed: 27233057
J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010 Aug;39(4):415-21
pubmed: 20643008
J Voice. 2011 Nov;25(6):709-13
pubmed: 21439778
Folia Phoniatr (Basel). 1968;20(4):185-201
pubmed: 5671971

Auteurs

Alice Q Liu (AQ)

Division of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. alice.liu@alumni.ubc.ca.
ORCID: 0000-0003-4813-836X

Yunqi Ji (Y)

Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Amanda Hu (A)

Division of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female

Evaluation of Low-Value Services Across Major Medicare Advantage Insurers and Traditional Medicare.

Ciara Duggan, Adam L Beckman, Ishani Ganguli et al.
1.00
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C

Effectiveness of Virtual Yoga for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Hallie Tankha, Devyn Gaskins, Amanda Shallcross et al.
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH

questionsmedicales.fr › Eucaryotes › Animaux › Chordés › Vertébrés › Mammifères › Eutheria › Primates › Haplorhini › Catarrhini › Hominidae › Humains › Do patients regret having in-office vocal fold...
questionsmedicales.fr › Personnes › Tranches d'âge › Adulte › Sujet âgé › Do patients regret having in-office vocal fold...
questionsmedicales.fr › Appareil respiratoire › Larynx › Glotte › Plis vocaux › Do patients regret having in-office vocal fold...
questionsmedicales.fr › Environnement et santé publique › Santé publique › Méthodes épidémiologiques › Caractéristiques des études épidémiologiques › Études épidémiologiques › Études cas-témoins › Do patients regret having in-office vocal fold...
questionsmedicales.fr › Appareil respiratoire › Larynx › Do patients regret having in-office vocal fold...
questionsmedicales.fr › Thérapeutique › Traitement médicamenteux › Voies d'administration de substances chimiques et des médicaments › Injections › Do patients regret having in-office vocal fold...
questionsmedicales.fr › Qualité, accès, évaluation des soins de santé › Qualité des soins de santé › Mécanismes d'évaluation des soins de santé › Évaluation des résultats et des processus en soins de santé › Évaluation de résultat (soins) › Résultat thérapeutique › Do patients regret having in-office vocal fold...
questionsmedicales.fr › Environnement et santé publique › Santé publique › Méthodes épidémiologiques › Caractéristiques des études épidémiologiques › Études épidémiologiques › Études de cohortes › Études rétrospectives › Do patients regret having in-office vocal fold...