Despite the growing experience obtained from the National Pro-Voice Campaigns in screening individuals with laryngeal alterations, we still have not established which would be the best assessment method: speech and hearing screening alone, laryngoscopy alone, or a joint work with physicians and speech therapists doing the screening together. AIM: the goal of the present study was to assess the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the auditory voice-perception analysis compared to videolaryngoscopy as a screening method for individuals with laryngo-pharyngeal disorders. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared the vocal aspects (GRBASI scale, pitch, loudness, CPF and resonance) and videolaryngoscopic from 567 individuals who participated in the National Pro-Voice Campaign 2005 in a tertiary university hospital. RESULTS: the most frequent laryngeal alteration was laryngo-pharyngeal reflux (LFR) (43.5%), followed by benign lesions (17%) and suspected malignant lesions (1%). The sensitivity of the auditory voice-perception assessment was of 91% for patients with benign lesions and 100% in those with suspected malignant lesions; however, it was only 76% in LFR. Of those tests considered normal, there were vocal alterations in 52%. The positive predictive value was of 71% and the negative was 61%. CONCLUSIONS: Despite its importance, the auditory voice-perception assessment should not be used as a single screening instrument in voice health campaigns.
laryngeal cancer; dysphonia; laryngoscopy
