Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.53 75-83 February 2010. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2009/09-0024)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrowCustom Print
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Erickson, E.
Right arrow Articles by Sivasankar, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Erickson, E.
Right arrow Articles by Sivasankar, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Delicious   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Articles

Evidence for Adverse Phonatory Change Following an Inhaled Combination Treatment

Elizabeth Erickson
Mahalakshmi Sivasankar
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN

Contact author: Mahalakshmi Sivasankar, Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907. E-mail: msivasankar{at}purdue.edu.

Purpose: Voice problems are reported as a frequent side effect of inhaled combination (IC) treatments. The purpose of this experimental study was to investigate whether IC treatments are detrimental to phonation. We hypothesized that IC treatment would significantly increase phonation threshold pressure (PTP) and perceived phonatory effort (PPE), whereas sham treatment would not.

Method: Fourteen healthy adults participated in a repeated-measures design in which they received IC and sham treatments in counterbalanced order. PTP and PPE were measured prior to treatments, immediately following treatments, and at 1 and 2 hr following treatments.

Results: IC treatment increased PTP, but sham treatment did not. The increase in PTP was maintained for a 2 hr period following administration. PPE ratings were not significantly correlated with PTP.

Conclusions: IC treatments can have acute, adverse effects on phonation. Detrimental phonatory effects were elicited in participants with no self-reported voice problems. IC treatments are being increasingly prescribed across the lifespan. The current data increase our understanding of the nature of phonatory deterioration associated with IC treatment and lay the groundwork for increased research effort to develop IC treatments that effectively control respiratory disease while minimizing an adverse effect on phonation.

KEY WORDS: inhaled combination treatments, corticosteroids, beta-agonists, voice problems


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JSLHRHome page
K. Tanner, N. Roy, R. M. Merrill, F. Muntz, D. R. Houtz, C. Sauder, M. Elstad, and J. Wright-Costa
Nebulized Isotonic Saline Versus Water Following a Laryngeal Desiccation Challenge in Classically Trained Sopranos
J Speech Lang Hear Res, December 1, 2010; 53(6): 1555 - 1566.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]