- Original Article
- Open Access
The role of auditory perceptual analysis of speech in predicting velopharyngeal gap size in children with velopharyngeal insufficiency
The Egyptian Journal of Otolaryngology volume 31, pages122–127(2015)
Assessment of velopharyngeal (VP) function starts with careful perceptual speech analysis, because it is the degree of speech impairment that dictates the need for intervention.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of auditory perceptual analysis of speech in predicting VP gap size in children with VP insufficiency.
Design and setting
This was a prospective correlation study conducted in a hospital-based setting.
Materials and methods
Referred sample of 38 participants with VP insufficiency and age ranging from 4 to 16 years were included in the study. The subjective evaluation of patients’ speech was carried out using four-point severity scales. This included degree of hypernasality, audible nasal emission of air, the compensatory articulations (glottal and pharyngeal articulation), and the overall intelligibility of speech. Nasalance scores for oral and nasal sentences were measured. A combination of nasopharyngoscopy and multiview videofluoroscopy was used to measure VP gap size, which was rated using the scale proposed by Golding-Kushner and colleagues. The studied patients were classified into three groups on the basis of the estimated gap size (small, moderate, and large VP gap groups).
Statistical analysis was carried out using analysis of variance and post-hoc tests.
There was a positive correlation between all studied auditory perceptual analysis variables and VP gap size. The degree of hypernasality and overall speech intelligibility had the strongest predictive values, followed by glottal articulation, nasal emission, pharyngeal articulation, and oral sentence nasalance score.
The study finding suggests that the size of the VP opening can be predicted on the basis of perceptual assessment of speech, which helps to anticipate the appropriate line of intervention without the need for invasive procedures.
Pamplona MC, Antonio Y, Katia C, Esperanza A. Study of strategies for treating compensatory articulation in patients with cleft palate. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2012; 11: 144–151.
Harding A, Grunwell P. Active versus passive cleft-type speech characteristics. Int J Lang Commun Disord 1998; 33: 329–352.
Dworkin JP, Marunick MT, Krouse JH. Velopharyngeal dysfunction: speech characteristics, variable etiologies, evaluation techniques, and differential treatments. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch 2004; 35: 333–352.
Howard S. Compensatory articulatory behaviours in adolescents with cleft palate: comparing the perceptual and instrumental evidence. Clin Linguist Phon 2004; 18: 313–340.
James M, Krakovitz AS. A review of the evaluation and management of velopharyngeal insufficiency in children. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2012; 45: 653–669.
Derek CY, Lam J, Jacqueline R, Jonathan A. Comparison of nasendoscopy and multiview videofluoroscopy in assessing velopharyngeal nsufficiency. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006; 134: 394–402.
Moller KT. An approach to evaluation of velopharyngeal adequacy for speech. Clin Commun Disord 1991; 1: 61–75.
Kummer AW, Briggs M, Lee L. The relationship between the characteristics of speech and velopharyngeal gap size. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2003; 40: 590–596.
Dalston, RM, Warren DW. Comparison of Tonar II, pressure flow, and listener judgments of hypernasality in the assessment of velopharyngeal function. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1986; 23:108–115.
Kent RD, Miolo G, Bloedel S. The intelligibility of children’s speech: a review of evaluation procedures. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 1994; 3: 81–95.
Kummer AW, Curtis C, Wiggs M, Lee L Strife JL. Comparison of velopharyngeal gap size in patients with hypernasality, hypernasality and nasal emission, or nasal turbulence (rustle) as the primary speech characteristic. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1992; 29: 152–156.
Golding-Kushner KJ, Argamaso RV, Cotton RT, Grames LM Henningsson G Jones DL et al. Standardization for the reporting of nasopharyngoscopy and multiview videofluoroscopy: a report from an International Working Group. Cleft Palate J 1990; 27: 337–347.
Bassiouny S, Hegazi M, Oraby T. Comparison between two methods of assessment of hypernasality in velopharyngeal incompetence patients. Benha Med J 2005; 22: 49–61.
Hegazi M, Gamal Eldin N, Abou-Elsaad T, Shoeib R, Hassan S. Perceived hypernasality in the presence of adequate velopharyngeal closure as measured by aerodynamic studies. Mansoura Med J 2003; 34: 95.
Abou-Elsaad T, Hegazi M, Zaki M, Amer A. Videofluoroscopic assessment of velo-pharyngeal port. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006; 135: 118.
Warren DW, Dalston RM, Mayo R. Hypernasality and velopharyngeal impairment. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1994; 31: 257–262.
Raymond JF. Oral and maxillofacial surgery. 2nd ed. Saunders: Elsevier Inc; 2009. 39:791–805.
Antonio Y, Carmen P, Elisa T. Change in velopharyngeal valving after speech therapy in cleft palate patients. A videonasopharyngoscopic and multi-view videofluoroscopic study. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 1992; 24: 45–54.
Sweeney T, Sell D. Relationship between perceptual ratings of nasality and nasometry in children/adolescents with cleft palate and/or velopharyngeal dysfunction. Int J Lang Commun Disord 2007; 3: 1–18.
Alexis A, Semmon F. Does velopharyngeal closure pattern affect the success of pharyngeal flap pharyngoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2005; 115: 45–53.
James M, Paul K, Austin S. A review of the evaluation and management of velopharyngeal insufficiency in children. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2012; 45: 653–669.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
About this article
Cite this article
Youssef, G., Alkhaja, A. The role of auditory perceptual analysis of speech in predicting velopharyngeal gap size in children with velopharyngeal insufficiency. Egypt J Otolaryngol 31, 122–127 (2015). https://doi.org/10.4103/1012-5574.156097
- auditory perceptual analysis
- cleft palate speech
- velopharyngeal gap size
- velopharyngeal insufficiency