Effects of inspiratory muscle training for 28 days on the voice of women without vocal complaints.
Julia Batistella, Alessandra Thais Beraldo, Perla do Nascimento Martins and 2 others
PMID 41779499WHAT IT FOUND
No perceptual voice change was seen, but acoustic stability and noise measures improved, along with maximum phonation times, diadochokinesis, and self-rated voice quality of life, handicap, and symptoms after 28 days of Respiron training in 22 vocally healthy women.
Key findings
01Auditory-perceptual ratings of overall vocal deviation did not change significantly after 28 days.
02Shimmer decreased from 2.58% to 1.91% and HNR increased from 21.04 dB to 22.46 dB; other acoustic measures did not differ.
03Maximum phonation times increased for /i/, /s/, /z/ and counting, diadochokinesis increased for /ka/, /a/ and /pataka/, and self-assessment showed higher voice quality of life and lower handicap and symptom scores.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was a single-group pre-post intervention with no control group, so changes over 28 days cannot be separated from normal variation, practice effects, or expectation. All participants were 22 young university students without vocal complaints, so the results do not show what happens in people with voice disorders or in older or professional voice users. The device levels were not calibrated to exact inspiratory pressure, and participants chose effort level by when spheres rose easily, so the training dose varied. Participants knew they were training, and self-assessment outcomes may be influenced by expectation, even though the auditory-perceptual evaluator was blinded to pre and post samples. Two of 24 initial participants were excluded during the study.
Declared interests
Financial support was a scholarship from Fundação Araucária. No other conflicts of interest are stated in the supplied text.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the acoustic, aerodynamic, diadochokinesis, and self-assessment changes as proof that the voice sounded better to others. The auditory-perceptual rating showed no significant difference, and there was no control group.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →