European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology

, Volume 271, Issue 5, pp 1157–1162 | Cite as

Change of Voice Handicap Index after treatment of benign laryngeal disorders

  • Marijn Stuut
  • Robin E. A. Tjon Pian Gi
  • Frederik G. Dikkers


Voice disorders can have major impact on quality of life. Problems caused by these disorders can be experienced in different domains. The Voice Handicap Index (VHI) is a well-known voice-related quality of life instrument to measure physical, emotional and functional complaints. VHI change after treatment in seven separate benign laryngeal disorders was studied. In addition, correlation between the three domains was examined. VHI forms were completed before and 3 months after treatment. In a 5-year-period, 143 patients with seven specific diagnoses were retrospectively included. VHI improved for six diagnoses polyp (p < 0.000), cyst (p = 0.001), unilateral paralysis (p = 0.001), Reinke edema (p = 0.016), papillomatosis (p = 0.001), nodules (p = 0.002). Sulcus glottidis did not change (p = 0.897). Mean VHI after treatment was higher for females (p = 0.021). The values of the three domains correlate statistically significant. For each diagnosis, the mean VHI after treatment remained higher than in subjects with a healthy voice. Because the domains are interdependent, their absolute values could not be compared. After treatment, VHI improved in six of the seven diagnoses. The scores on the physical, emotional, and functional domain are interdependent. Scores of the different domains cannot be compared.


Benign laryngeal disorders Voice Handicap Index Quality of life Treatment outcome 


Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Verdolini K, Ramig LO (2001) Review: occupational risks for voice problems. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol 26(1):37–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hanschmann H, Lohmann A, Berger R (2011) Comparison of subjective assessment of voice disorders and objective voice measurement. Folia Phoniatr Logop 63(2):83–87PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roy N, Merrill RM, Thibeault S, Parsa RA, Gray SD, Smith EM (2004) Prevalence of voice disorders in teachers and the general population. J Speech Lang Hear Res 47(2):281–293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Roy N, Merrill RM, Thibeault S, Gray SD, Smith EM (2004) Voice disorders in teachers and the general population: effects on work performance, attendance, and future career choices. J Speech Lang Hear Res 47(3):542–551PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roy N, Merrill RM, Gray SD, Smith EM (2005) Voice disorders in the general population: prevalence, risk factors, and occupational impact. Laryngoscope 115(11):1988–1995PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sliwinska-Kowalska M, Niebudek-Bogusz E, Fiszer M, Los-Spychalska T, Kotylo P, Sznurowska-Przygocka B et al (2006) The prevalence and risk factors for occupational voice disorders in teachers. Folia Phoniatr Logop 58(2):85–101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thibeault SL, Merrill RM, Roy N, Gray SD, Smith EM (2004) Occupational risk factors associated with voice disorders among teachers. Ann Epidemiol 14(10):786–792PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zraick RI, Risner BY (2008) Assessment of quality of life in persons with voice disorders. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 16(3):188–193PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hsiung MW, Pai L, Wang HW (2002) Correlation between voice handicap index and voice laboratory measurements in dysphonic patients. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 259(2):97–99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Woisard V, Bodin S, Yardeni E, Puech M (2007) The voice handicap index: correlation between subjective patient response and quantitative assessment of voice. J Voice 21(5):623–631PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wheeler KM, Collins SP, Sapienza CM (2006) The relationship between VHI scores and specific acoustic measures of mildly disordered voice production. J Voice 20(2):308–317PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Smits R, Marres H, de Jong F (2011) The relation of vocal fold lesions and voice quality to voice handicap and psychosomatic well-being. J Voice 26(4):466–470 Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dejonckere PH, Bradley P, Clemente P, Cornut G, Crevier-Buchman L, Friedrich G et al (2001) A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques. Guideline elaborated by the Committee on Phoniatrics of the European Laryngological Society (ELS). Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 258(2):77–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jacobson BH, Johnson A, Grywalski C (1997) The Voice Handicap Index (VHI): development and validation. Am J Speech Language Pathol 6:66–70Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hogikyan ND, Sethuraman G (1999) Validation of an instrument to measure voice-related quality of life (V-RQOL). J Voice 13(4):557–569PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Deary IJ, Wilson JA, Carding PN, MacKenzie K (2003) VoiSS: a patient-derived Voice Symptom Scale. J Psychosom Res 54(5):483–489PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rosen CA, Lee AS, Osborne J, Zullo T, Murry T (2004) Development and validation of the voice handicap index-10. Laryngoscope 114(9):1549–1556PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bouwers F, Dikkers FG (2009) A retrospective study concerning the psychosocial impact of voice disorders: voice Handicap Index change in patients with benign voice disorders after treatment (measured with the Dutch version of the VHI). J Voice 23(2):218–224PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Benninger MS, Ahuja AS, Gardner G, Grywalski C (1998) Assessing outcomes for dysphonic patients. J Voice 12(4):540–550PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moerman M, Martens JP, Dejonckere P (2004) Application of the Voice Handicap Index in 45 patients with substitution voicing after total laryngectomy. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 261(8):423–428PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Murry T, Rosen CA (2000) Outcome measurements and quality of life in voice disorders. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 33(4):905–916PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Murry T, Medrado R, Hogikyan ND, Aviv JE (2004) The relationship between ratings of voice quality and quality of life measures. J Voice 18(2):183–192PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Guimaraes I, Abberton E (2004) An investigation of the Voice Handicap Index with speakers of Portuguese: preliminary data. J Voice 18(1):71–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hakkesteegt MM, Brocaar MP, Wieringa MH (2010) The applicability of the dysphonia severity index and the voice handicap index in evaluating effects of voice therapy and phonosurgery. J Voice 24(2):199–205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hakkesteegt MM, Wieringa MH, Gerritsma EJ, Feenstra L (2006) Reproducibility of the Dutch version of the Voice Handicap Index. Folia Phoniatr Logop 58(2):132–138PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rosen CA, Murry T, Zinn A, Zullo T, Sonbolian M (2000) Voice handicap index change following treatment of voice disorders. J Voice 14(4):619–623PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cohen SM, Statham M, Rosen CA, Zullo T (2009) Development and validation of the Singing Voice Handicap-10. Laryngoscope 119(9):1864–1869PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wilson JA, Webb A, Carding PN, Steen IN, MacKenzie K, Deary IJ (2004) The Voice Symptom Scale (VoiSS) and the Vocal Handicap Index (VHI): a comparison of structure and content. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 29(2):169–174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nawka T, Wiesmann U, Gonnermann U (2003) Validation of the German version of the Voice Handicap Index. HNO 51(11):921–930PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Niebudek-Bogusz E, Kuzanska A, Woznicka E, Sliwinska-Kowalska M (2011) Assessment of the voice handicap index as a screening tool in dysphonic patients. Folia Phoniatr Logop 63(5):269–272PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cohen SM, Dupont WD, Courey MS (2006) Quality-of-life impact of non-neoplastic voice disorders: a meta-analysis. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 115(2):128–134PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Butler JE, Hammond TH, Gray SD (2001) Gender-related differences of hyaluronic acid distribution in the human vocal fold. Laryngoscope 111(5):907–911PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ward PD, Thibeault SL, Gray SD (2002) Hyaluronic acid: its role in voice. J Voice 16(3):303–309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bouchayer M, Cornut G, Witzig E, Loire R, Roch JB, Bastian RW (1985) Epidermoid cysts, sulci, and mucosal bridges of the true vocal cord: a report of 157 cases. Laryngoscope 95(9 Pt 1):1087–1094PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Giovanni A, Chanteret C, Lagier A (2007) Sulcus vocalis: a review. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 264(4):337–344PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pontes P, Behlau M (2010) Sulcus mucosal slicing technique. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 18(6):512–520PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Dikkers FG, Nikkels P (1995) Benign lesions of the vocal folds: histopathology and phonotrauma. G. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 104:698–703Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marijn Stuut
    • 1
    • 2
  • Robin E. A. Tjon Pian Gi
    • 1
  • Frederik G. Dikkers
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center GroningenUniversity of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck SurgeryMaastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations