Advertisement

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology

, Volume 276, Issue 6, pp 1573–1583 | Cite as

Voice rehabilitation for laryngeal cancer after radiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Mahoko TaitoEmail author
  • Shunsuke Taito
  • Masahiro Banno
  • Takashi Fujiwara
  • Hitoshi Okamura
  • Hiraku Tsujimoto
  • Yuki Kataoka
  • Yasushi Tsujimoto
Review Article

Abstract

Purpose

We aimed to determine whether voice rehabilitation after radiotherapy improves the quality of life (QOL), voice function, and self-rated voice function in patients with laryngeal cancer.

Methods

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for randomized controlled trials published between inception and October 2018. The primary outcome was QOL, adverse events and mortality. Secondary outcomes included voice function and self-rated voice function. The quality of evidence was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

Results

Three trials (enrolling 122 patients) compared voice rehabilitation to usual care or no intervention after radiotherapy. Voice rehabilitation did not significantly improve any QOL scores. Data on adverse events and mortality were not available in any of the trials. Voice rehabilitation did not improve any voice function scores, such as jitter (mean difference: – 0.48 [– 1.27 to 0.32]), shimmer (mean difference: – 0.04 [– 0.27 to 0.19]), maximum phonation time (mean difference: 1.54 [– 1.13 to 4.22]), and the grade, roughness, breathiness, asthenia, and strain scale (mean difference: – 0.39 [– 2.59 to 1.80]). Voice rehabilitation also did not improve the voice handicap index, which was used as a self-rated voice function score (mean difference: 5.54 [– 2.07 to 13.16]). The certainty of the evidence was graded as low for primary and secondary outcomes.

Conclusion

Voice rehabilitation for patients with laryngeal cancer after radiotherapy might not improve QOL, voice function, and self-rated voice function. Pre-specified voice rehabilitation programs may not be necessary for all patients with laryngeal cancer after radiotherapy.

Keywords

Laryngeal cancer Radiotherapy Voice rehabilitation Quality of life Systematic review 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Lisa Tuomi, Therese Karlsson (Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg), Caterina Finzia (Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital), and Vrushali Angadi (Division of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Kentucky), for providing us with additional information regarding their studies. We would like to thank Editage (https://www.editage.jp/) for English language editing.

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they do not have any conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

405_2019_5452_MOESM1_ESM.doc (64 kb)
Supplementary file1 (DOC 64 kb)
405_2019_5452_MOESM2_ESM.docx (17 kb)
Supplementary file2 (DOCX 16 kb)
405_2019_5452_MOESM3_ESM.docx (18 kb)
Supplementary file3 (DOCX 17 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    National Cancer Institute (2016) SEER: Cancer Stat Facts: Larynx CancerGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2016) Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin 66:7–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Metreau A, Louvel G, Godey B, Le Clech G, Jegoux F (2014) Long-term functional and quality of life evaluation after treatment for advanced pharyngolaryngeal carcinoma. Head Neck 36:1604–1610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lazarus CL, Husaini H, Hu K et al (2014) Functional outcomes and quality of life after chemoradiotherapy: baseline and 3 and 6 months post-treatment. Dysphagia 29:365–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rosa MED, Mituuti CT, Ghirardi A (2018) Correlation between the Voice Handicap and Swallowing Quality of Life in patients with laryngeal cancer submitted to chemoradiotherapy. CoDAS 30:e20170060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Taito M, Taito S, Banno M, et al (2017) A systematic review and meta-analysis of voice rehabilitation in patients after radiotherapy for laryngeal cancer. PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=81881 Accessed 26 Mar 2019
  7. 7.
    Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 6:e1000100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6:e1000097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Higgins JP, Green S. (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE et al (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336:924–926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA et al (2011) GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol 64:383–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bergstrom L, Ward EC, Finizia C (2017) Voice rehabilitation after laryngeal cancer: Associated effects on psychological well-being. Support Care Cancer 25:2683–2690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    La Mantia I, Cupid F, Andaloro C (2018) Vocal function exercises and vocal hygiene combined treatment approach as a method of improving voice quality in irradiated patients for laryngeal cancers. Acta Med Mediterr 34:525–529Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Angadi V, Dressler E, Stemple J (2017) A multidimensional study of vocal function following radiation therapy for laryngeal cancers. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 126:483–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Karlsson T, Johansson M, Andrell P, Finizia C (2015) Effects of voice rehabilitation on health-related quality of life, communication and voice in laryngeal cancer patients treated with radiotherapy: a randomised controlled trial. Acta Oncol 54:1017–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    van Gogh CD, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM et al (2006) The efficacy of voice therapy in patients after treatment for early glottic carcinoma. Cancer 106:95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Angadi V, Croake D, Stemple J (2019) Effects of vocal function exercises: a systematic review. J Voice 33:124.e13–124.e34CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of NursingHiroshima University HospitalHiroshimaJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of Biomedical and Health SciencesHiroshima UniversityHiroshimaJapan
  3. 3.Division of Rehabilitation, Department of Clinical Practice and SupportHiroshima University HospitalHiroshimaJapan
  4. 4.Department of PsychiatrySeichiryo HospitalAichiJapan
  5. 5.Department of PsychiatryNagoya University Graduate School of MedicineAichiJapan
  6. 6.Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck SurgeryKurashiki Central HospitalOkayamaJapan
  7. 7.Hospital Care Research UnitHyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical CenterHyogoJapan
  8. 8.Department of Respiratory MedicineHyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical CenterHyogoJapan
  9. 9.Department of Healthcare Epidemiology, School of Public Health in the Graduate School of MedicineKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  10. 10.Department of Nephrology and DialysisKyoritsu HospitalHyogoJapan

Personalised recommendations