{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018680677174547577, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005837711617046118, 'mean_word_length': 5.467924528301887, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Applicability of Resonance Tube Phonation in Water for Semi-Occluded Vocal Tract Voice Training and Therapy

Background: Exercises involving tube phonation in water (TPW) have emerged as an alternative to conventional voice therapy techniques. The objective was to determine whether the results of these techniques were comparable to each other for the treatment of voice pathology, as well as to compare the costs implicated in the delivery of each treatment. Methods: A retrospective, descriptive, and observational study was performed that included all patients evaluated in our voice unit in 2015 who received vocal rehabilitation treatments. They were divided into two groups depending on the treatment technique used. The patients’ voice was evaluated subjectively using the GRBAS scale. We compared the clinical results and the specific costs of each technique. Results: A total of 55 patients were studied, of which 28 followed TPW exercises, and 27 underwent supervised vocal rehabilitation (SVR). Most of the patients who received TPW therapy were diagnosed with functional dysphonia, whereas functional-organic dysphonia was the most common pathology in the SVR group. Significant differences were evident when the total GRBAS scores were compared before and after the treatments, yet not when the GRBAS scores were compared between the two rehabilitation techniques. The incremental cost-effectiveness analysis revealed that TPW was less expensive than SVR, with both techniques proving to be equally effective in improving the pathological problems. Conclusions: TPW is similarly effective as SVR techniques in treating voice pathologies, yet it is significantly cheaper in terms of healthcare costs.