↓ Skip to main content

A psychosocial intervention for the management of functional dysphonia: complex intervention development and pilot randomised trial

Overview of attention for article published in Pilot and Feasibility Studies, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A psychosocial intervention for the management of functional dysphonia: complex intervention development and pilot randomised trial
Published in
Pilot and Feasibility Studies, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40814-018-0240-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vincent Deary, Elaine McColl, Paul Carding, Tracy Miller, Janet Wilson

Abstract

Medically unexplained loss or alteration of voice-functional dysphonia-is the commonest presentation to speech and language therapists (SLTs). Besides the impact on personal and work life, functional dysphonia is also associated with increased levels of anxiety and depression and poor general health. Voice therapy delivered by SLTs improves voice but not these associated symptoms. The aims of this research were the systematic development of a complex intervention to improve the treatment of functional dysphonia, and the trialling of this intervention for feasibility and acceptability to SLTs and patients in a randomised pilot study. A theoretical model of medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) was elaborated through literature review and synthesis. This was initially applied as an assessment format in a series of patient interviews. Data from this stage and a small consecutive cohort study were used to design and refine a brief cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) training intervention for a SLT. This was then implemented in an external pilot patient randomised trial where one SLT delivered standard voice therapy or voice therapy plus CBT to 74 patients. The primary outcomes were of the acceptability of the intervention to patients and the SLT, and the feasibility of changing the SLT's clinical practice through a brief training. This was measured through monitoring treatment flow and through structured analysis of the content of intervention for treatment fidelity and inter-treatment contamination. As measured by treatment flow, the intervention was as acceptable as standard voice therapy to patients. Analysis of treatment content showed that the SLT was able to conduct a complex CBT formulation and deliver novel treatment strategies for fatigue, sleep, anxiety and depression in the majority of patients. On pre-post measures of voice and quality of life, patients in both treatment arms improved. These interventions were acceptable to patients. Emotional and psychosocial issues presented routinely in the study patient group and CBT techniques were used, deliberately and inadvertently, in both treatment arms. This CBT "contamination" of the voice therapy only arm reflects the chief limitation of the study: one therapist delivered both treatments. Registered with the ISRCTN under the title:Training a Speech and Language Therapist in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy to treat Functional Dysphonia - A Randomised Controlled Trial.Trial Identifier: ISRCTN20582523 Registered 19/05/2010; retrospectively registered. http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN20582523.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 15%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 3%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 26 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 15 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 16%
Psychology 11 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 36 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 February 2018.
All research outputs
#4,054,833
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#257
of 1,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,710
of 439,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#9
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,047 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,449 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.