ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2024
Quality of Life of Patients Using Esophageal Speech after Total Laryngectomy: A Systematic Review Study.
Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term health-related quality of life following an online rehabilitation program after total laryngectomy: a 3-year retrospective longitudinal study.Journal of medicine and life · 2026Observational
- Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy in locally advanced hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: The present systematic study aimed to assess whether using esophageal speech (ES) as a method of vocal rehabilitation in patients after total laryngectomy enhances their quality of life (QoL) and vocal functionality based on patients' reports. (2) Methods: Data collection was conducted from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Speech Bite, and the PRISMA Flow Diagram tool was used to record different stages of the literature search process. In the review, nine studies were included, while a bias check was carried out using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists. Survey analysis incorporated quantitative and qualitative data, including standardized questionnaires and audio analyses. (3) Results: A technique's effectiveness depends on the method's functionality and the patient's abilities. Furthermore, the findings revealed that ES use unexpectedly affects quality of life regarding patients. While statistical analysis of the studies showed that some patients reported improvement in quality of life and vocal functionality, others faced challenges such as difficulty in learning the technique, long-term intervention, and unsatisfactory phonetic performance. Some studies observed quantitative measures, such as improved Voice Impairment Index (VHI) scores and Voice-Related Quality of Life (V-RQOL) scores. However, results were not uniformly positive across studies, with a subset of patients reporting minimal improvement. (4) Conclusions: The limited literature on the effect of ES on patients' QoL appears to influence the results in different ways. However, research data support that patients' communication and psychological state seem to improve significantly compared to patients who have not been rehabilitated. The final assessment of the technique's effectiveness on quality of life must depend on many factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.