Use of Stimulability Testing Among Laryngologists: High Value, High Variability
Access to this document is restricted. Some items have been embargoed at the request of the author, but will be made publicly available after the "No Access Until" date.
During the embargo period, you may request access to the item by clicking the link to the restricted file(s) and completing the request form. If we have contact information for a Cornell author, we will contact the author and request permission to provide access. If we do not have contact information for a Cornell author, or the author denies or does not respond to our inquiry, we will not be able to provide access. For more information, review our policies for restricted content.
OBJECTIVES: Voice-specialized speech-language pathologists (SLPs) frequently use stimulability testing to determine patient candidacy for behavioral therapy. All authors have anecdotally seen this practice extend to laryngologists; however, the extent to which laryngologists utilize stimulability testing is currently unknown. This study aimed to establish the frequency, circumstances, and rationale for stimulability testing among laryngologists. METHODS: An anonymous survey consisting of 29 questions about stimulability practices was electronically distributed to laryngologists. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 66 fellowship-trained laryngologists across eight countries. About 94% of laryngologists reported that stimulability testing was performed always (51%) or sometimes (43%) with their voice patients. Stimulability testing was completed most frequently by the SLP (53%) compared with laryngologists (38%) or fellows (7%). Laryngologists who did not work closely with SLPs were more likely to report "I don't know" or "never" when asked how often stimulability was performed (P = 0.006). Neither years of practice experience nor practice location (US region, Canada, or "other") were predictive of who performed stimulability testing or how often stimulability was performed. All surveyed laryngologists reported there was a benefit to performing stimulability testing and that it impacted their plan of care. Despite this, 87% felt they needed more education and training in how to incorporate stimulability testing into their clinical practice. About 86% reported they had no standardized protocol or were unsure if their clinic used a standard stimulability protocol. CONCLUSION: The results underline the need for continued collaboration and interdisciplinary training between laryngologists and SLPs to enhance patient care.