| 1. |
- Finizia, Caterina, 1961, et al.
(author)
-
A cross-sectional validation study of Self-Evaluation of Communication Experiences after Laryngeal Cancer--a questionnaire for use in the voice rehabilitation of laryngeal cancer patients.
- 1999
-
In: Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden). - 0284-186X. ; 38:5, s. 573-80
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- A psychometric evaluation of the questionnaire 'Self-Evaluation of Communication Experiences after Laryngeal Cancer' (S-SECEL) addressing communication dysfunction in patients with laryngeal cancer was carried out. Ninety-three patients with laryngeal cancer were studied. For comparison of response patterns and external validation, 21 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and 26 patients with hoarseness, caused by benign laryngeal disease, were included in the analysis. The patients completed three questionnaires; the S-SECEL, the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HAD). The S-SECEL questionnaire was well-accepted by the patients, compliance was satisfactory, and missing value rates were low. The reliability of the S-SECEL was satisfactory for the Environment and Attitude subscales, whereas the General subscale did not reach the reliability levels recommended for group comparisons. In general, the response pattern in the three diagnostic groups and the pattern of correlations between the S-SECEL scores and the SIP- and HAD-subscales and dimensions lent support to the construct validity of the S-SECEL.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Finizia, Caterina, 1961, et al.
(author)
-
Advanced laryngeal cancer T3-T4 in Sweden: a retrospective study 1986-1990. Survival and locoregional control related to treatment.
- 1996
-
In: Acta oto-laryngologica. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0001-6489 .- 1651-2251. ; 116:6, s. 906-12
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Different treatment modalities for advanced laryngeal cancer are much discussed in the literature. One-hundred-and-sixty patients with T3-4, N0-3, M0-1 laryngeal cancer diagnosed in Sweden between 1986 and 1990 were retrospectively analysed. One hundred (65 T3: 35 T4) received radical radiotherapy with salvage surgery (RRSS) in case of residual or recurrent disease. Thirty-eight (11T3: 27 T4) patients received surgery with or without radiotherapy (S +/- RT). Twenty-two patients received no treatment. After a median follow up of 4.4 years, the estimated 5-year actuarial corrected survival and 3-year locoregional control were 59% and 44% for T3 RRSS and 47% and 54% for T3 S +/- RT. No significant difference between the different treatment modalities was found. The 5-year corrected survival rate and the locoregional control at 3 years between T4-RRSS (32%; 26%) and T4-S + RT (58%; 68%) groups were significantly different (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01). This might suggest that surgery with or without radiotherapy still has its place as a treatment modality for patients with advanced T4 laryngeal carcinoma.
|
|
| 4. |
- Finizia, Caterina, 1961, et al.
(author)
-
Intelligibility and perceptual ratings after treatment for laryngeal cancer: laryngectomy versus radiotherapy.
- 1998
-
In: The Laryngoscope. - 0023-852X. ; 108:1 Pt 1, s. 138-43
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In Sweden the most common treatment for T3-T4 laryngeal carcinoma is radical radiotherapy (with surgery for salvage), because the voice is thus preserved. A Swedish study showed that surgery yielded a significantly better 5-year survival and locoregional control at 3 years in T4 laryngeal carcinoma than radical radiotherapy. With these results in mind, we wanted to compare the different modes of treatment (surgery with a tracheoesophageal [TE] fistula and radical radiotherapy) with respect to the patients' speech proficiency. Twenty-eight subjects (with 14 patients in each treatment group) were judged by inexperienced and experienced listeners according to intelligibility by transcription and three perceptual ratings. From the perceptual ratings of speech intelligibility, voice quality, and speech acceptability we conclude that there is a significant difference, the irradiated speakers being rated higher than the tracheoesophageal speakers. It is also clear that most of the TE and irradiated laryngeal speaking patients are comparable to normal laryngeal speakers in intelligibility by transcription. Experienced and inexperienced listeners are able to rate TE and irradiated laryngeal speech reliably and similarly according to intelligibility by transcription. The inexperienced listeners rated the TE speakers significantly higher than did the experienced listeners.
|
|
