ABSTRACT
Purpose:
to compare nasalance scores between speech samples with and without pharyngeal fricative and with and without hypernasality.
Methods:
a total of 840 speech samples was analyzed in this study. The samples were rated by three experienced judges with consensus regarding the aspects of hypernasality and pharyngeal fricative. The ratings were distributed into 4 groups: G1: 255 samples rated as representative of presence of hypernasality; G2: 130 samples rated as representative of use of pharyngeal fricative and hypernasality; G3: 280 samples rated as representative of normal speech for speakers with history of cleft palate; G4: 175 samples rated as representative of normal speech for speakers without history of cleft palate. Statistical analysis involved the Kruskal-Wallis test and when significant the Dunn's test was used to compared pairs of data.
Results:
the ratings established with agreement between the 3 experienced judges allowed for the identification of the samples representative of use of pharyngeal fricative and hypernasal speech. Nasalance scores were establish for each group revealing a significant difference between groups G1+G2 (representative of speech errors) and groups G3+G4 (representative of normal speech). The difference between the group with hypernasality (G1) and the group with pharyngeal fricative (G2) was not significant.
Conclusion:
the use of pharyngeal fricative did not influence significantly the nasalance values obtained for the studied sample.
Keywords:
Cleft Palate; Velopharyngeal Insufficiency; Speech; Reproducibility of Tests
