Preprint Brief Report Version 1 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

Post-Laryngectomy Voice Prosthesis Changes by Speech-Language-Pathologists: Preliminary results.

Version 1 : Received: 4 July 2022 / Approved: 5 July 2022 / Online: 5 July 2022 (05:44:14 CEST)

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

Hans, S.; Vialatte de Pemille, G.; Baudouin, R.; Julien-Laferriere, A.; Couineau, F.; Crevier-Buchman, L.; Circiu, M.P.; Lechien, J.R. Post-Laryngectomy Voice Prosthesis Changes by Speech-Language Pathologists: Preliminary Results. J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 4113. Hans, S.; Vialatte de Pemille, G.; Baudouin, R.; Julien-Laferriere, A.; Couineau, F.; Crevier-Buchman, L.; Circiu, M.P.; Lechien, J.R. Post-Laryngectomy Voice Prosthesis Changes by Speech-Language Pathologists: Preliminary Results. J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 4113.

Journal reference: J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 4113
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11144113

Abstract

Background: In the present study, we assessed the feasibility and success outcomes of voice prosthesis (VP) changes when performed by speech-language pathologist (SLP). Methods: Patients treated with total laryngectomy (TL) from January 2020 to December 2020 were prospectively recruited from our medical center. Patients benefited from tracheoesophageal puncture. The VP changes were performed by the senior SLP and the following data were collected for each VP change: date of placement; change or removal; VP type and size; reason for change or removal; and use of a washer for periprosthetic leakage. A patient-reported outcome questionnaire including 6 items was proposed to patients at each VP change (Appendix 1). Items were assessed with a 10-point Likert-scale. Results: Fifty-two VP changes were performed by the senior SLP during the study period. The mean duration of the SLP consultation, including patient history, examination and VP change procedure was 20 min (range: 15-30). The median prosthesis lifetime was 88 days. The main reasons for VP changes were transprosthetic (N=34; 79%) and periprosthetic (N=7; 21%) leakages, respectively. SLP successfully performed all VP changes. He did not change one VP but used a periprosthetic silastic to stop the periprosthetic leakages. In two cases, SLP needed the surgeon examination to discuss about the following indication: implant mucosa inclusion and autologous fat injection. The patient satisfaction was high according to the speed and the quality of care by the SLP. Conclusion: The delegation of VP change from the otolaryngologist-head and neck sur-geon to the speech-language pathologist (SLP) may be done without significant complications. The delegation of VP change procedure to SLP may be interesting in some rural regions with otolaryngologist shortage.

Keywords

Total Laryngectomy; Cancer; Voice; Voice prosthesis; Otolaryngology; Head Neck Surgery; Speech Language Therapists.

Subject

MEDICINE & PHARMACOLOGY, Other

Comments (0)

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 0
Metrics 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.

We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here.