CClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06960772Updated May 7, 2025

Efficacy of Flow Ball Phonation in Professional Voice Users

An interventional study of Flow Ball Intervention and Straw Phonation Intervention in Prevention of Voice Disorders in Professional Voice Users and Treatment of Functional Voice Disorders in Professional Voice Users, sponsored by University Ghent. Recruiting at 1 site in Belgium. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 60 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-05-07.

Sponsored by University Ghent · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
144
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 60 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of flow ball phonation on the voice of professional voice users and elite vocal performers, both with and without functional voice disorders. Given the substantial vocal demands inherent to this population and their reliance on the voice for occupational purposes, this intervention may represent a valuable approach for the prevention and/or treatment voice disorders.

Read the detailed description

Background. Due to the high vocal demands, professional voice users (e.g. teachers) and elite vocal performers (e.g. singers) are risk populations for developing voice disorders. High-quality voice research in these vulnerable populations is highly needed for effective and efficient treatment and prevention of voice disorders. The flow ball (FB) is a promising innovative voice therapy device to perform semi-occluded vocal tract exercises (SOVTE) with the extra advantage of providing real-time visual feedback of the airflow. Despite this important advantage, strong efficacy studies of an FB intervention program are lacking.

Objective. To investigate the immediate-, short- and long-term effects of an SOVTE intervention with the FB on the phonation of professional voice users with (treatment) and without (prevention) voice disorders and to compare it with the 'treatment as usual' straw phonation (SP) and a sham condition, using a longitudinal randomized sham-controlled trial (RCT).

Methods. Subjects will be randomly assigned into an FB group, an SP group or a control (sham) group. They will receive a short-term intensive voice intervention of 3 weeks, combining both guided therapy/training sessions and independent practice at home. A flexible strobovideolaryngoscopy and a multidimensional voice assessment will be performed by assessors blinded to group allocation and study phase. Assessments will be performed two times before the intervention (pre 1 and pre 2), immediately after the intensive intervention (post 1) and at 3 weeks (follow-up 1) and 3 months (follow-up 2) follow-up. The sham group will use the same FB device but no phonation will be involved.

02

Conditions studied

  • Prevention of Voice Disorders in Professional Voice Users
  • Treatment of Functional Voice Disorders in Professional Voice Users

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Flow Ball
  • SOVTE
  • professional voice users
  • Straw Phonation
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 60 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Eligibility criteria

OBJECTIVE 1: TREATMENT

Inclusion Criteria:

  • All genders
  • All ethnicities
  • 18 - 60 years
  • Diagnosis of a functional voice disorder
  • Professional voice users

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Diagnosis of an organic voice disorder
  • Current participation in voice therapy
  • Previous phonosurgical interventions
  • Pregnancy
  • Smoking
  • Nasal or ear diseases
  • Neurological disorders

OBJECTIVE 2: PREVENTION

Inclusion Criteria:

  • All genders
  • All ethnicities
  • 18 - 60 years
  • Professional voice users

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Current or previous diagnosis of a voice disorder
  • Current or previous participation in voice therapy
  • Previous phonosurgical interventions
  • Pregnancy
  • Smoking
  • Nasal or ear diseases
  • Neurological disorders
04

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Investigator)
Enrollment
144 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Flow Ball

    Behavioral: Flow Ball Intervention

  • Experimental
    Straw Phonation

    Behavioral: Straw Phonation Intervention

  • Sham comparator
    Sham Intervention

    Behavioral: Sham Intervention

Interventions

  • BehavioralFlow Ball Intervention

    Participants receive an intensive intervention using the Flow Ball device over 3 weeks (a total of 5 hours), consisting of weekly: * 1 in-person guided session of 30 minutes * 2 guided online sessions of 15 minutes each (via teleconsult) * On the remaining 4 days of the week, participants perform independent training at home: 5 minutes, twice daily. This training is recorded using the app 'MyMedicoach'

  • BehavioralStraw Phonation Intervention

    Participants receive an intensive intervention using a straw over 3 weeks (a total of 5 hours), consisting of weekly: * 1 in-person guided session of 30 minutes * 2 guided online sessions of 15 minutes each (via teleconsult) * On the remaining 4 days of the week, participants perform independent training at home: 5 minutes, twice daily. This training is recorded using the app 'MyMedicoach'

  • BehavioralSham Intervention

    Participants receive an intensive intervention over 3 weeks (a total of 5 hours), consisting of weekly: * 1 in-person guided session of 30 minutes * 2 guided online sessions of 15 minutes each (via teleconsult) * On the remaining 4 days of the week, participants perform independent training at home: 5 minutes, twice daily. This training is recorded using the app 'MyMedicoach' The sham intervention uses breathing exercises through the Flow Ball, no phonation will be involved.

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Flexible Strobovideolaryngoscopy

    Laryngeal function determined with the Voice-Vibratory Assessment with Laryngeal Imaging (VALI) rating form (Poburka et al., 2017).

    Time frame: baseline (before the intervention) and 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention)

  2. Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI)

    DSI: A higher index indicates a better voice quality. The index ranges from -5 to +5 for severely dysphonic to normal voices. A more negative index indicates a worse voice quality. Values \> +5 are possible in subjects with excellent vocal capacities. A DSI = +1.6 is the threshold separating normophonic from dysphonic persons.

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

  3. Acoustic Voice Quality Index (AVQI)

    A lower AVQI indicates a better voice quality. The index ranges from 0 to 10 for normal to severely dysphonic voices. An AVQI of 2.95 is the threshold separating normophonic from dysphonic persons.

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

  4. Consensus Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice (CAPE-V)

    The CAPE-V will be used to provide an auditory-perceptual evaluation of the voice quality. This visual analogue scale will examine the voice based on the parameters grade, roughness, breathiness, asthenia, strain, instability, pitch and loudness.

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

  5. Voice Handicap Index

    VHI: A lower index indicates less impact of the voice impairment on the quality of life. The VHI ranges from 0 to 120.

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

Secondary outcomes

  1. Maximum phonation time (MPT)

    The MPT is measured using a chronometer and the best trial out of three attempts is selected for further analysis. Participants are instructed to sustain the vowel /a:/ at their habitual pitch and loudness after a maximal inspiration. Verbal encouragement is employed to maximize phonation duration

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

  2. Fundamental frequency (fo)

    To assess fo participants will produce the vowel /a:/ at their habitual pitch and loudness for three seconds, following an automatic series (counting to three).

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

  3. Jitter

    To assess the jitter participants will produce the vowel /a:/ at their habitual pitch and loudness for three seconds, following an automatic series (counting to three).

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

  4. Shimmer

    To assess the shimmer participants will produce the vowel /a:/ at their habitual pitch and loudness for three seconds, following an automatic series (counting to three).

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

  5. Noise to Harmonics Ratio (NHR)

    To assess NHR participants will produce the vowel /a:/ at their habitual pitch and loudness for three seconds, following an automatic series (counting to three).

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

  6. Voice Range Profile (VRP)

    The VRP indicates the vocal capabilities by examining the range of both fundamental frequency and intensity. The participants will produce the vowel /a:/ respectively at their minimum pitch, minimum intensity, maximum pitch, and maximum intensity to determine their VRP (lowest and highest fundamental frequency (Flow, Fhigh) and lowest and highest intensity (Ilow, Ihigh)).

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

  7. Vocal Tract Discomfort Scale (VTDS)

    VTDS: A lower index indicates less discomfort in the vocal tract. The index ranges from 0 to 96.

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

  8. Vocal Fatigue Index (VFI)

    VFI: A lower index indicates less vocal fatigue. The index ranges from 0 to 76.

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

  9. Singing Voice Handicap Index 10 (SVHI-10)

    Only used with singers. The SVHI-10-NL is used assess self-perceived voice handicap among singers with singing voice difficulties. A higher index indicates a greater perceived singing voice handicap and scores of 14 or above are considered deviant. The index ranges from 0 to 40.

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

  10. Evaluation of Ability to Sing Easily (EASE-NL)

    Only used with singers. The EASE-NL is a tool to assess singer's perceptions of the current status of their singing voice. It is more sensitive to detect subtle changes of the singer's voice. A higher index indicates a more deviant score. The index ranges from 0 to 60.

    Time frame: baseline (twice before the intervention), 3 weeks (immediately after the intervention), 3 weeks follow-up, 3 months follow-up

06

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Ghent University
    Ghent, East-Flanders 9000, Belgium
    Recruiting
07

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06960772
Lead sponsor
University Ghent
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
May 7, 2025
Start date
May 8, 2025 (estimated)
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Sep 30, 2028 (estimated)
Last update
May 7, 2025

Study contacts

Casey Dewanckele
Contact
casey.dewanckele@ugent.be
+32491547192
Evelien D'haeseleer
principal investigator · University Ghent

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion