Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T09:21:55.739Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Voice rest after vocal fold surgery: current practice and evidence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2013

A C Coombs ,
A J Carswell  and
P A Tierney
A C Coombs*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Southmead Hospital, Westbury-on-Trym, Bristol, UK
A J Carswell
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Southmead Hospital, Westbury-on-Trym, Bristol, UK
P A Tierney
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Southmead Hospital, Westbury-on-Trym, Bristol, UK
*
Address for correspondence: Dr A C Coombs, Bridge House, Gara Bridge, Totnes TQ9 7JT, UK Fax: 01548 821362 E-mail: coombs.alice@googlemail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

Voice rest is commonly recommended after vocal fold surgery, but there is a lack of evidence base and no standard protocol. The aim of this study was to establish common practice regarding voice rest following vocal fold surgery.

Method:

An online survey was circulated via e-mail invitation to members of the ENT UK Expert Panel between October and November 2011.

Results:

The survey revealed that 86.5 per cent of respondents agreed that ‘complete voice rest’ means no sound production at all, but there was variability in how ‘relative voice rest’ was defined. There was no dominant type of voice rest routinely recommended after surgery for laryngeal papillomatosis or intermediate pathologies. There was considerable variability in the duration of voice rest recommended, with no statistically significant, most popular response (except for malignant lesions). Surgeons with less than 10 years of experience were more likely to recommend fewer days of voice rest.

Conclusion:

There is a lack of consistency in advice given to patients after vocal fold surgery, in terms of both type and length of voice rest. This may arise from an absence of robust evidence on which to base practice.

Keywords

LaryngoscopyVoicePostoperative Care
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 127 , Issue 8 , August 2013 , pp. 773 - 779
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Hospital Episode Statistics 2011. In: http://www.hesonline.nhs.uk/Ease/servlet/ContentServer?siteID=1937&categoryID=215 [16 January 2012]Google Scholar
2Behrman, A, Sulica, L. Voice rest after microlaryngoscopy: current opinion and practice. Laryngoscope 2003;113:2182–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Harries, M. Phonosurgery. In: Gleeson, MJ, ed. Scott-Brown's Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, 7th edn, vol 2. London: Hodder Arnold, 2008;2236–47Google Scholar
4Rousseau, B, Cohen, SM, Zeller, AS, Scearce, L, Tritter, AG, Garrett, CG. Compliance and quality of life in patients on prescribed voice rest. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2011;144:104–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Koufman, JA, Blalock, PD. Is voice rest never indicated? J Voice 1989;3:87–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Baker, BM, Fox, SM, Baker, CD, McMurry, GT. Persistent hoarseness after surgical removal of vocal cord lesions. Arch Otolaryngol 1981;107:148–51CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7Ishikawa, K, Thibeault, S. Voice rest versus exercise: a review of the literature. J Voice 2010;24:379–87CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8Frank, CB. Ligament healing: current knowledge and clinical applications. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 1994;4:74–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9Cantu, RI, Steffe, JA. Soft tissue healing considerations after surgery. In: Maxey, L, Magnusson, J, eds. Rehabilitation for the Postsurgical Orthopaedic Patient, 2nd edn.St Louis: Mosby, 2007;2–10Google Scholar
10Cho, SH, Kim, HT, Lee, IJ, Kim, MS, Park, HJ. Influence of phonation on basement membrane zone recovery after phonomicrosurgery: a canine model. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2000;109:658–66CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Branski, RC, Rosen, CA, Verdolini, K, Hebda, PA. Acute vocal fold wound healing in a rabbit model. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2005;114:19–24CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12Tateya, I, Tateya, T, Lim, X, Sohn, JH, Bless, DM. Cell production in injured vocal folds: a rat study. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2006;115:135–43CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Gray, S, Titze, I. Histologic investigation of hyperphonated canine vocal cords. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1988;97:381–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14Rousseau, B, Ge, P, French, LC, Zealear, DL, Thibeault, SL, Ossoff, RH. Experimentally induced phonation increases matrix metalloproteinase-1 gene expression in normal rabbit vocal fold. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008;138:62–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Titze, IR, Hitchcock, RW, Broadhead, K, Webb, K, Li, W, Gray, SD et al. Design and validation of a bioreactor for engineering vocal fold tissues under combined tensile and vibrational stresses. J Biomech 2004;37:1521–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16Kutty, JK, Webb, K. Vibration stimulates vocal mucosa-like matrix expression by hydrogel-encapsulated fibroblasts. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 2010;4:62–72Google ScholarPubMed