Pre- and post-operative voice therapy (PaPOV): Development of an intervention for patients with benign vocal fold lesions.
Anna White, Paul Carding, Vicky Booth and 1 others
PMID 36047250WHAT IT FOUND
Twenty-seven components of a pre- and post-operative voice therapy programme for benign vocal fold lesions achieved consensus across four data sources.
The authors state the intervention is not yet suitable for clinical use and requires further refinement before a feasibility trial.
Key findings
01Of 61 proposed components for a pre- and post-operative voice therapy intervention for benign vocal fold lesions, 27 achieved consensus across the four data sources and 34 did not.
02The 34 components that failed consensus were more often due to silence in the data (27) than to dissonance (7). Two key areas of disagreement were the duration of post-operative voice rest and the dosing of exercises.
03The authors state the intervention is not currently suitable for clinical implementation and that the protocol needs further refinement before a feasibility trial is conducted.
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 underlying systematic review included only 35 studies, and the authors note that most of these had poor reporting of intervention details, materials, and dosing, which created large areas of silence in the triangulation. 34 of 61 proposed components failed to reach consensus, leaving substantial gaps in what the intervention should include. The PPI group consisted of 5 patients, and the survey included clinicians with varying levels of BVFL-specific experience. The intervention is explicitly not ready for clinical implementation; the authors state it needs further refinement and a feasibility trial before it can be tested. Many areas of silence were attributed to poor reporting in the existing literature rather than to the absence of practice, so the gaps may overstate what is actually unknown.
Declared interests
Funded by an NIHR (National Institute for Health and Care Research) Programme Grant. No commercial conflicts of interest are declared in the text provided.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the 27 consensus components as a ready-to-use clinical protocol. The authors explicitly state the intervention is not suitable for implementation into clinical practice and that the protocol needs further refinement before a feasibility trial is conducted. This is a development paper identifying what should go into a future intervention, not a validated treatment to adopt on Monday.
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 →