Search

Introduction: Aim: to evaluate the predictive ability of the Nutritional Risk Emergency - 2017 (NRE) to predict prolonged length of stay, ICU admission intra-mortality and readmission, severe postoperative complications. Methods: a prospective cohort was conducted with surgical patients admitted in a public tertiary hospital. The NRE-2017 tool was applied for detecting malnutrition risk in hospitalized patients. Surgical complications were assessed by Clavien-Dindo. Patients were followed during hospitalization to identify length of stay as well as stay after surgery in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Regression analysis was performed to assess the association between risk of malnutrition and clinical outcomes. Results: we included 162 elective surgery patients; 79 patients were identified with nutritional risk using the NRE-2017 (≥ 1.5) tool and 83 without nutritional risk. Patients with nutritional risk were at higher risk of prolonged hospitalization [18 (10-36) days vs. 13 (7-23 days); p: 0.006] and ICU hospitalization [6 (2-14 days vs. 3.5 (1-7 days; p: 0.020]. There was an association between surgical complications and nutritional risk independently, but the significance was lost when adjusting the analysis. There was no association with mortality and readmission in this sample of patients. Conclusion: the NRE-2017 tool was associated with hospital stay in those patients at nutritional risk, however there was no association with mortality and readmission.

Background: Evidence across a range of musically trained, hearing disordered and voice disordered populations present conflicting results regarding the relationship between pitch discrimination (PD) and voice quality. PD characteristics of female speakers with and without a musical training background and no self-reported voice disorder, and the relationship between PD and voice quality in this particular population, have not been investigated., Aims: To evaluate PD characteristics in a cohort of female participants without a self-reported voice disorder and the relationship between PD and acoustic voice measures., Method: One hundred fourteen female participants were studied, all of whom self-reported as being non-voice disordered. All completed the Newcastle Assessment of Pitch Discrimination which involved a two-tone PD task. Their voices were recorded producing standardized vocal tasks. Voice samples were acoustically analyzed for frequency-domain measures (fundamental frequency and its standard deviation, and harmonics-to-noise ratio) and spectral-domain measures (cepstral peak prominence and the Cepstral/Spectral Index of Dysphonia). Data were analyzed for the whole cohort and for musical and non-musical training backgrounds., Results: In the whole cohort, there were no significant correlations between PD and acoustic voice measures. PD accuracy in musically trained speakers was better than in non-trained speakers and correlated with fundamental frequency standard deviation in prolonged vowel tasks. Vocalists demonstrated superior PD accuracy and fundamental frequency standard deviation in prolonged vowels compared to instrumentalists but did not show significant correlations between PD and acoustic measures. The Newcastle Assessment of Pitch Discrimination was a reliable tool, showing moderate-good prediction value in differentiating musical background., Conclusions: There was little evidence of a relationship between PD and acoustic measures of voice quality, regardless of musical training background and superior PD accuracy among the musically trained. These data do not support ideas concerning the co-development of perception and action among individuals identified as having voice quality measures within normal ranges. Numerous measures of voice quality, including measures sensitive to pitch, did not distinguish across musically and non-musically trained individuals, despite individual differences in pitch discrimination., Competing Interests: Competing interests The authors have no competing interests to declare in this study., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To systematically evaluate the evidence for the reliability, sensitivity and specificity of existing measures of vowel-initial voice onset., Methods: A literature search was conducted across electronic databases for published studies (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, PubMed Central, IEEE Xplore) and grey literature (ProQuest for unpublished dissertations) measuring vowel onset. Eligibility criteria included research of any study design type or context focused on measuring human voice onset on an initial vowel. Two independent reviewers were involved at each stage of title and abstract screening, data extraction and analysis. Data extracted included measures used, their reliability, sensitivity and specificity. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE as the data of interest was extracted., Results: The search retrieved 6,983 records. Titles and abstracts were screened against the inclusion criteria by two independent reviewers, with a third reviewer responsible for conflict resolution. Thirty-five papers were included in the review, which identified five categories of voice onset measurement: auditory perceptual, acoustic, aerodynamic, physiological and visual imaging. Reliability was explored in 14 papers with varied reliability ratings, while sensitivity was rarely assessed, and no assessment of specificity was conducted across any of the included records. Certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate with high variability in methodology and voice onset measures used., Conclusions: A range of vowel-initial voice onset measurements have been applied throughout the literature, however, there is a lack of evidence regarding their sensitivity, specificity and reliability in the detection and discrimination of voice onset types. Heterogeneity in study populations and methods used preclude conclusions on the most valid measures. There is a clear need for standardisation of research methodology, and for future studies to examine the practicality of these measures in research and clinical settings., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Chacon et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is a highly prevalent disease worldwide and in Colombia, representing one of the main causes of death and placing a considerable burden on healthcare systems. 13 classes of drugs are approved for the treatment of T2DM, with Glucagon-like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists being a first-line treatment option for patients with or at high risk of certain cardiovascular diseases and chronic kidney disease. The objective of this study is to conduct a short-term cost-effectiveness analysis of once-weekly semaglutide versus once-weekly dulaglutide in Colombian adults with T2DM, from a third-party payer perspective., Methods: Numbers needed to treat were calculated for different single and composite endpoints of the SUSTAIN 7 trial, annual costs for once weekly semaglutide 1.0 mg and dulaglutide 1.5 mg were extracted from the public SISMED database. With these inputs a cost of control model was developed, to obtain the annual cost of bringing one T2DM patient to relevant clinical outcomes by using semaglutide or dulaglutide., Results: Semaglutide was considered cost-effective compared to dulaglutide across all pre-specified endpoints, even in the different scenarios evaluated in the sensitivity analyses, and in a particularly pronounced manner for weight loss outcomes. Semaglutide at a dose of 1.0 mg once-weekly was cost-effective compared to dulaglutide 1.5 mg across all outcomes in the short-term, making it an appropriate first-line choice in the treatment of T2DM when deciding between these two GLP-1 receptor agonists., Conclusions: This is the first short-term cost-effectiveness study of semaglutide and dulaglutide in T2DM Colombian patients. Our modeled results suggest that once-weekly semaglutide represents a cost-effective option for treating individuals with T2DM in Colombia who are not achieving glycaemia control with metformin, and it would be expected to improve HbA1C, promote greater weight loss and reduce costs from a third-payer perspective compared with treatment with dulaglutide., Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed., (Copyright: © 2023 Liebisch-Rey H et al.)

Objective: The primary objective of the present systematic review is to: (1) identify the current vocal tasks being used for acoustic and/or auditory perceptual analysis to differentiate between individuals with and without voice disorders. The secondary objectives are to: (2) evaluate the evidence of the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of those vocal tasks for acoustic and/or auditory perceptual analysis in discriminating the individuals with voice disorders from those without; and (3) compare the values between the vocal tasks in discriminating individuals with voice disorders from those without., Method and Analysis: We search the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, PubMed Central and Google Scholar. Grey literature searches will include ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials. Websites of professional organisations and textbooks will be hand searched for relevant information related to the research question. Study screening, selection and data extraction will be conducted independently by two reviewers. Any disagreements will be resolved by discussion or by involving a third reviewer.The methodological quality of the included studies will be appraised using the relevant Critical Appraisal Tools by JBI. The clinical guidelines and recommendations for voice assessment by professional bodies will be appraised using the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) checklist. The findings will be presented in the form of an information matrix with the tasks identified tabulated against the nature of the task, dimensions being tested, and their accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity in identifying individuals with voice problems., Ethics and Dissemination: Formal ethics approval is not required. The findings will be presented at national and international conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42023431634., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Auditory perception plays an important role in voice control. Pitch discrimination (PD) is a key index of auditory perception and is influenced by a variety of factors. Little is known about the potential effects of voice disorders on PD and whether PD testing can differentiate people with and without a voice disorder. We thus evaluated PD in a voice-disordered group ( n = 71) and a non-voice-disordered control group ( n = 80). The voice disorders included muscle tension dysphonia and neurological voice disorders and all participants underwent PD testing as part of a comprehensive voice assessment. Percentage of accurate responses and PD threshold were compared across groups. The PD percentage accuracy was significantly lower in the voice-disordered group than the control group, irrespective of musical background. Participants with voice disorders also required a larger PD threshold to correctly discriminate pitch differences. The mean PD threshold significantly discriminated the voice-disordered groups from the control group. These results have implications for the voice control and pathogenesis of voice disorders. They support the inclusion of PD testing during comprehensive voice assessment and throughout the treatment process for patients with voice disorders.

Introduction: SARS-CoV-2, a highly contagious severe acute respiratory syndrome, has spread to most countries in the world and resulted in a change to practice patterns for the assessment and diagnosis of people with voice disorders. Many services are transitioning to telehealth models to maintain physical distancing measures and conserve personal protective equipment used by healthcare workers during laryngoscopy examinations. The speech-language pathology primary contact (SLPPC) assessment for patients referred to ear, nose and throat (ENT) services in Australia has been shown to reduce waiting times for assessment while streamlining access to ENT assessment and allied health practitioner treatment pathways., Methods and Analysis: A prospective observational cohort study will see patients in a newly developed telehealth model which uses the principles from a usual care SLPPC assessment protocol. Participants will be offered an initial telehealth assessment (speech-language pathology primary contact telehealth (SLPPC-T)) prior to being prioritised for a face-to-face laryngoscopy assessment to complete the diagnostic process. The telehealth assessment will collect sociodemographic information, personal and family medical history, key symptoms, onset and variability of symptoms, red-flag signs or symptoms for laryngeal malignancy, and clinical voice assessment data for auditory-perceptual and acoustic analysis. The study outcomes include (1) association of signs, symptoms and specific voice measures collected during SLPPC-T with voice disorder classification provided after laryngoscopy; (2) degree of concordance between voice disorder classification after SLPPC-T and after laryngoscopy; (3) health service and patient-related costs and health outcomes of the SLPPC-T; (4) patient and stakeholder views and beliefs about the SLPPC-T process., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval has been granted prior to commencement of the study enrolment by the Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (reference number HREC/2020/QGC/62832). Results will be shared through the publication of articles in peer-reviewed medical journals and presentation at national and international scientific meetings., Trial Registration Number: ACTRN12621000427875., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)