Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37332417›Full record

ArticleCureus2023

Laryngectomy: Phonation Alternatives and Their Impact on the Quality of Life.

Ana Rodrigues, Francisco Alves de Sousa, Maria J Casanova, Ana Silva, Telma Feliciano, Susana Vaz Freitas, Ricardo Pinto, João Lino

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A Misleading Stone: Case Report of a Giant Sialolithiasis and Review of Literature.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ana RodriguesOtolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas Abel Salazar, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, PRT.
Francisco Alves de SousaOtolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Santo António, Porto, PRT.
Maria J CasanovaOtolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Santo António, Porto, PRT.
Ana SilvaOtolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Santo António, Porto, PRT.
Telma FelicianoOtolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Santo António, Porto, PRT.
Susana Vaz FreitasSpeech Therapy, Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Santo António, Porto, PRT.
Ricardo PintoGastroenterology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Santo António, Porto, PRT.
João LinoOtolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Santo António, Porto, PRT.
Hospital de Santo António · PTCentro Hospitalar do Porto · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background The decision to consent to surgery is a life-changing moment. This study addresses the impact of total laryngectomy (TL) on phonation and its effect on the quality of life (QoL) of patients. The primary objective of this cohort study is to compare the alternatives in phonation rehabilitation, and the secondary objective is to identify concurrent predictors of vocal outcomes. Methodology To perform a comprehensive analysis, we reviewed data from patients who underwent TL with bilateral radical neck dissection in the Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery at Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Santo António between January 2010 and October 2022. Adult patients who consented to participate in the study and underwent subjective evaluation were included in this study. Data regarding clinical history was primarily collected. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Different types of vocal rehabilitation formed the subgroups to be compared. An additional analysis was performed for baseline variables collected in the clinical records, and vocal outcomes were measured using the Self-Evaluation of Communication Experiences After Laryngectomy (SECEL) questionnaire. Furthermore, linear models taking SECEL scores as the outcome were developed. Results The first search identified a total of 124 patients operated during the study period. In total, 63 patients were alive at the time of the current follow-up, with 61 deaths (49%). Overall, 26 of the 63 alive patients completed the SECEL questionnaire. All patients were male. The mean age at diagnosis was 62.2 ± 10.6 years. The mean age at the time of subjective vocal assessment with the SECEL questionnaire was 66.3 ± 10.4 years. The mean time of follow-up after the initial diagnosis was 4 ± 3.8 years. A statistically significant difference was observed in esophageal speech (ES), which was inferior to other modalities (mean SECEL total score for ES: 46.6 ± 12.2 vs. mean SECEL total score for all other modalities: 33 ± 15.1; p = 0.03). The follow-up time correlated significantly with vocal function, as measured by the SECEL questionnaire (p = 0.013). Conclusions The SECEL questionnaire can be a valuable tool to evaluate QoL in laryngectomy patients, given its usefulness in assessing the psychological impact derived from vocal functionality in this group. ES appears inferior to other modalities regarding voice-related QoL.

Indexed as

carcinoma of larynxelectronic larynxesophageal speechphonationquality of liferehabilitationseceltotal laryngectomytracheoesophageal speechvoice rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID37332417
PMCPMC10270312
OpenAlexW4376957021

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.