Socioeconomic Influence on Speech Rehabilitation After Total Laryngectomy.
laryngectomy
social determinants
speech therapy
vocal prosthesis
Journal
Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery
ISSN: 1097-6817
Titre abrégé: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8508176
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Dec 2023
Historique:
revised:
31
05
2023
received:
21
12
2022
accepted:
13
06
2023
medline:
22
11
2023
pubmed:
9
7
2023
entrez:
9
7
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Speech rehabilitation following a total laryngectomy significantly impacts the quality of life. Indwelling prosthetic voice restoration provides optimal outcomes; however, the long-term maintenance of these devices carries considerable financial costs, which are not universally covered by insurance. This investigation aimed to analyze associations between socioeconomic factors and outcomes in postlaryngectomy speech rehabilitation. Retrospective cohort analysis. Academic tertiary-care center from May 2014 to September 2021. In patients undergoing total laryngectomy, the incidence of tracheoesophageal puncture with indwelling vocal prostheses (TEP-VP) placement within the first postoperative year was compared among household income, demographic factors, and disease characteristics. Functional and maintenance outcomes served as secondary endpoints. Seventy-seven patients were included. Forty-five (58%) underwent indwelling TEP-VP (41 primaries). Eighty-nine percent of patients with annual incomes greater than $50k underwent TEP-VP compared to only 35% with incomes less than $50k/year. TEP-VP was performed in 85% of patients with commercial insurance, 70% with Medicare, 42% with Medicaid, and 0% with no insurance. On multivariate analysis, annual household incomes greater than $50k were predicted for TEP-VP placement (odds ratio: 12.7 [2.45-65.8], p = .002). The utilization of postoperative speech therapy and functional communication outcomes were similar among socioeconomic groups. Twelve patients were unable to afford supplies within the first year, with differences noted among insurance (p = .015) and income status (p = .003). Disparities in vocal and speech rehabilitation following laryngectomy may disproportionally affect underserved patients.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1499-1505Informations de copyright
© 2023 American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation.
Références
Volin RA. Predicting failure to speak after laryngectomy. Laryngoscope. 1980;90(10 pt 1):1727-1736.
Sharpe G, Camoes Costa V, Doubé W, Sita J, McCarthy C, Carding P. Communication changes with laryngectomy and impact on quality of life: a review. Qual Life Res. 2019;28(4):863-877.
Patel RS, Mohr T, Hartman C, et al. Tracheoesophageal prosthesis use is associated with improved overall quality of life in veterans with laryngeal cancer. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2018;127(7):421-428.
Apert V, Carsuzaa F, Tonnerre D, et al. Speech restoration with tracheoesophageal prosthesis after total laryngectomy: an observational study of vocal results, complications and quality of life. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2022;139:73-76.
Chone CT, Gripp FM, Spina AL, Crespo AN. Primary versus secondary tracheoesophageal puncture for speech rehabilitation in total laryngectomy: long-term results with indwelling voice prosthesis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005;133:89-93.
Bozec A, Poissonnet G, Chamorey E, et al. Results of vocal rehabilitation using tracheoesophageal voice prosthesis after total laryngectomy and their predictive factors. Eur Arch Otrhinolaryngol. 2010;267:751-758.
Shuman AG, Larkin K, Thomas D, et al. Patient reflections on decision making for laryngeal cancer treatment. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;156(2):299-304.
Forner D, Noel CW, Shuman AG, et al. Shared decision-making in head and neck surgery: a review. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020;146(9):839-844.
Singer S, Merbach M, Dietz A, Schwarz R. Psychosocial determinants of successful voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy. J Chin Med Assoc. 2007;70:407-423.
Frith C, Buffalo MD, Montague JC. Relationships between esophageal speech proficiency and surgical, biographical, and social factors. J Commun Disord. 1985;18:475-483.
Richardson JL, Graham JW, Shelton DR. Social environment and adjustment after laryngectomy. Health Soc Work. 1989;14:283-292.
Sethi RKV, Deschler DG. National trends in primary tracheoesophageal puncture after total laryngectomy. Laryngoscope. 2018;128:2320-2325.
Beck AJCC, Harten WH, Brekel MWM, Navran A, Retèl VP. Cost-effectiveness of surgery versus organ preservation in advanced laryngeal cancer. Laryngoscope. 2021;131:E509-E517.
Graville D, Gross N, Andersen P, Everts E, Cohen J. The long-term indwelling tracheoesophageal prosthesis for alaryngeal voice rehabilitation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1999;125:288-292.
Dedhia RC, Smith KJ, Weissfeld JL, et al. Cost-identification analysis of total laryngectomy: an itemized approach to hospital costs. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2011;144(2):220-224.
Kesteloot K, Nolis I, Huygh J, Delaere P, Feenstra L. Costs and effects of tracheoesophageal speech compared with esophageal speech in laryngectomy patients. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg. 1994;48(4):387-394.
Aenta Inc. Clinical Policy Bulletin. Number: 0560. Voice prosthesis for voice rehabilitation following total laryngectomy. August 2022. Accessed December 18, 2022. http://www.aetna.com/cpb/medical/data/500_599/0560.html
New Jersey Department of Human Services: Division of Death and Hard of Hearing. Equipment Distribution Program. 2022. Accessed December 18, 2022. https://www.state.nj.us/humanservices/ddhh/services/edp
Lu YA, Pei YC, Chuang HF, et al. Speech performance after anterolateral thigh phonatory tube reconstruction for total laryngectomy. Laryngoscope. 2021;131:1349-1357.