《口腔颌面外科杂志》 ›› 2021, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (5): 314-318. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-4979.2021.05.009

• 临床总结 • 上一篇    下一篇

腭裂术后语音障碍患儿的语音清晰度及言语康复治疗效果分析

张春光1(), 赵志宇1(), 么远1, 王琛2, 卢娜1, 陈晖1   

  1. 1 华北理工大学附属医院口腔科,河北 唐山 063000
    2 华北理工大学冀唐学院图书馆,河北 唐山 063210
  • 收稿日期:2020-07-07 修回日期:2021-03-09 出版日期:2024-03-21 发布日期:2021-12-30
  • 通讯作者: 赵志宇
  • 作者简介:

    张春光(1982—),男,河北唐山人,主治医师,硕士. E-mail:

  • 基金资助:
    河北省卫生健康委员会河北省医学科学研究青年科技课题(20191158)

Acoustic analysis of phonetic intelligibility and speech rehabilitation in children with cleft palate after palatoplasty

ZHANG Chunguang1(), ZHAO Zhiyu1(), YAO Yuan1, WANG Chen2, LU Na1, CHEN Hui1   

  1. 1 Department of Stomatology, North China University of Science and Technology Hospital, Tangshan 063000, Hebei Province
    2 School Library, Jitang College, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan 063210, Hebei Province, China
  • Received:2020-07-07 Revised:2021-03-09 Online:2024-03-21 Published:2021-12-30
  • Contact: ZHAO Zhiyu

摘要:

目的: 探讨腭裂(cleft palate,CP)术后嗓音障碍(voice disorder,VD)患儿的语音特点及言语康复治疗效果。方法: 选取我院2018年1月—2018年12月收治的40例行CP修复术的患儿,所有患儿均在CP修复术后1个月接受言语康复治疗,对比言语康复治疗前后/a/音声学特点参数和临床疗效。结果: 腭裂修补术后,患儿经言语康复治疗后,其发/a/音时的基频(F0)值,与治疗前差异无统计学意义(t=0.661,P>0.05);言语康复后,谐噪比(harmonic-noise ratio,HNR)值明显大于治疗前,标准化噪声能量(normalized noise energy,NNE)、振幅微扰(Shimmer)、基频微扰(Jitter)值明显小于治疗前(t=1.690、3.974、2.287、24.558,P<0.05);言语康复治疗前,重度VD患儿语音清晰度(phonetic intelligibility,PI)明显低于轻度患儿(F=3.452,P<0.05),治疗后,不同程度术后VD患儿PI值均显著提升,组间对比,差异无统计学意义(F=1.153,P>0.05)。CP术后重、中、轻度VD患儿临床治疗有效率分别为88.89%、100.00%、100.00%。结论: CP修复术后常存在VD,言语康复治疗可有效提升CP患儿嗓音音质;临床应重视腭裂术后的VD训练。

关键词: 腭裂, 腭裂修复术, 嗓音障碍, 语音特点, 言语康复

Abstract:

Objective: To investigate the voice characteristics and the effect of speech rehabilitation in children with voice disorder (VD) after cleft palate (CP) plastic surgery. Methods: We selected 40 children who underwent CP repair in our hospital (January 2018 to December 2018), and all of them received speech rehabilitation one month after CP repair. The /a/ sound acoustic characteristic parameters and clinical efficacy were compared before and after speech rehabilitation treatment. Results: After the CP plastic surgery, there was no significant difference in the F0 value of /a/ sound before and after the speech rehabilitation (t=0.661, P>0.05). After speech rehabilitation, the harmonic-noise ratio(HNR) value was significantly higher than that before treatment, and the normalized noise energy(NNE), amplitude perturbation (Shimmer) and fundamental frequency perturbation (Jitter) values were significantly lower than those before treatment (t=1.690, 3.974, 2.287, 24.558, P<0.05); before speech rehabilitation treatment, the phonetic intelligibility(PI) value of children with severe VD was significantly lower than that of children with mild VD (F=3.452, P<0.05). After treatment, the PI value of children with different postoperative VD severity increased significantly, and there was no difference among the groups (F=1.153, P>0.05). The effective rates of clinical treatment for severe, moderate and mild children were 88.89%, 100.00% and 100.00% respectively. Conclusions: VD often exists after CP palatoplasty, and speech rehabilitation can effectively improve the voice quality of children with CP. VD training after CP surgery should be emphasized in clinical practice.

Key words: cleft palate, cleft palate repair, voice disorder, phonetic features, speech rehabilitation