Attitudes and practices of 50 prominent laryngologic surgeons were surveyed to determine current trends and implications for postoperative speech rehabilitation. Data are available for 1,003 laryngectomy operations performed over the past 3-year period by the 22 responders (44%). Those surgeons responding indicated a preference toward tracheoesophageal shunt procedures. A negative correlation was noted between the increased number of tracheoesophageal shunt procedures and the age of the surgeon. Additional responses provided information regarding personal preferences for postlaryngectomy speech types, opinions regarding artificial device use, and speech rehabilitation referral practices.
JohnsonJT, CasperJ, LesswingNJ. Toward the total rehabilitation of the alaryngeal patient.Laryngoscope1979;89:1813–9.
2.
SalmonSJ. A survey report concerning artificial larynx speakers.Proceedings of the Laryngectomee Rehabilitation Seminar, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn, 1975:1–11.
3.
BralleyRC, TavorminaJB, ZaiserJM. Psychosocial effects of laryngectomies on patients and spouses: II interview.Presented at the American Speech and Hearing Association Convention, Chicago, Nov 2–5, 1977.
4.
KommersMS, SullivanMD, YonkersAJ. “Practical suggestions on counseling. How I do it.” Counseling the laryngectomized patient.Laryngoscope1977;87:1961–5.
5.
DuguayMJ. Preoperative ideas of speech after laryngectomy.Arch Otolaryngol1966;83:237–40.
6.
McNeilBJ, WeichselbaumR, PaukerSG. Speech and survival.N Engl J Med1981;305:982–7.
7.
LauderE.The laryngectomee and the artificial larynx.J Speech Hear Disord1968;33:147–57.
8.
LauderE.The laryngectomee and the artificial larynx — a second look.J Speech Hear Disord1970;35:62–5.
9.
GatesGA, RyanW, LauderE.Current status of laryngectomee rehabilitation: IV. Attitudes about laryngectomee rehabilitation should change.Am J Otolaryngol1982;2:97–103.
10.
GatesGA, RyanW, CantuE, HearneE.Current status of laryngectomee rehabilitation: II. Causes of failure.Am J Otolaryngol1982;1:8–14.
11.
DuguayMJ. Why not both? In: SalmonSJ, GoldsteinLP, eds. The artificial larynx handbook.New York: Grune & Stratton, 1978:3–10.
12.
GoodeRL. Artificial laryngeal devices in post-laryngectomy rehabilitation.Presented at the Centennial Conference on Laryngeal Cancer, Toronto, Ontario, May 27–31, 1974.
13.
EdelmanF.Attitudes and practices regarding speech aid use following laryngectomy.J Speech Hear Disord1984;49:219–24.
14.
ClarkJG. Alaryngeal speech intelligibility and the older listener.J Speech Hear Disord1985;50:60–5.
15.
American Cancer Society.Cancer facts and figures, 1979.
16.
RyanW, GatesGA, CantuE, HearnEM. Current status of laryngectomee rehabilitation: III. Understanding of esophageal speech.Am J Otolaryngol1982;2:91–6.
17.
McCroskeyRL, MulliganM.The relative intelligibility of esophageal speech and artificial larynx speech.J Speech Hear Disord1963;1:37–41.
18.
LopezMJ, KraybillW, McElroyTH, GuerraO.Voice rehabilitation practices among head and neck surgeons.Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol1987;96:261–3.
