Effect of Augmentative Technology on Communication and Quality of Life After Tracheostomy or Total Laryngectomy. (1st June 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Haring, Catherine T.; Farlow, Janice L.; Leginza, Marie; Vance, Kaitlin; Blakely, Anna; Lyden, Teresa; Hoesli, Rebecca C.; Neal, Molly E. Heft; Brenner, Michael J.; Hogikyan, Norman D.; Morrison, Robert J.; Casper, Keith A.
• Is Part Of: Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery. Volume 167:Number 6(2022)
• Page Start: 985
• Page End: 990
• Publication Date: 2021-06-01
• Subjects: patient safety -- quality improvement -- communication -- quality of life -- aphonia -- tracheostomy -- laryngectomy -- augmentative technology -- voice; Head -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Neck -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Otolaryngology -- Periodicals; 617.51
• DOI: 10.1177/01945998211013778
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0194-5998

Abstract

Abstract : Objective: Surgical procedures that render patients acutely aphonic can cause them to experience significant anxiety and distress. We queried patient perceptions after tracheostomy or laryngectomy and investigated whether introducing augmentative technology was associated with improvement in patient‐reported outcomes. Methods: Participants included hospitalized patients who acutely lost the ability to speak due to tracheostomy or total laryngectomy from April 2018 to December 2019. We distributed questions regarding the patient communication experience and relevant questions from the validated V‐RQOL questionnaire (Voice‐Related Quality of Life). Patients were offered a tablet with the electronic communication application Verbally. Pre‐ and postintervention groups were compared with chi‐square analyses. Results: Surveys were completed by 35 patients (n = 18, preintervention; n = 17, postintervention). Prior to using augmentative technology, 89% of patients who were aphonic reported difficulty communicating, specifically noting breathing or suctioning (56%), treatment and discharge plans (78%), or immediate needs, such as pain and using the bathroom (39%). Communication difficulties caused anxiety (55%), depression (44%), or frustration (62%), and 92% of patients were interested in using an electronic communication device. Patients reported less trouble communicating after the intervention versus before (53% vs 89%, P =. 03), including less difficulty communicating about treatment or discharge plans (35% vs 78%, P <. 01). V‐RQOL scores were unchanged. Discussion: Acute loss of phonation arising from surgery can be highly distressing for patients, and use of augmentative technology may alleviate some of these challenges by improving communication. Further studies are needed to identify what additional strategies may improve overall well‐being. Implications for Practice: Electronic communication devices may benefit patients with acute aphonia.