Loge Mann 1978
Loge Mann 1978
Loge Mann 1978
Jeri A. Logemann
Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, Illinois
Hilda B. Fisher
Northwestern University, Evanston., Illinois
In this study, the frequency of occurrence of speech and voice symptoms in 200
Parkinson patients was defined by two expert listeners from high-fidelity tape re-
cordings of conversational speech samples and readings of the sentence version of
the Fisher-Logemann Test o] Articulation Competence. Specific phonemes that
were misarticulated were catalogued. Other vocal-tract dysfunctions, including laryn-
geal disorders, rate disorders, and hypernasality, were also recorded. Cooccurrence
of symptoms in each patient was tabulated. Examination of the patterns of co-
occurring dysfunctions permitted classifying the 200 patients into five groups: Group
1 (45% of file patients) with laryngeal dysfunction as their only vocal-tract symp-
tom; Group 2 (13.5% of the patients) with laryngeal and back-tongue involvement;
Group 3 (17% of the patients) with laryngeal, hack-tongue, and tongue-blade dys-
function; Group 4 (5.5% of the patients) with laryngeal dysfunction, back-tongue
involvement, tongue-blade dysfunction, and labial misarticulations; and Group 5
(9% of the patients) with laryngeal dysfunction and misarticulations of the back
tongue, tongue blade, lips, and tongue tip. Disfluencies and hypernasality did not
follow a systematic pattern of cooccurrence with other vocal-tract dysfunctions.
47
1. What is the frequency of specific vocal tract dysfunctions in a large sample of pa-
tients with Parkinsonism?
2. What are the specific phonemes affected by the reduction in lingual or labial
control?
3. What are the patterns of cooccurrence of various vocal tract dysfunctions in these
patients?
PROCEDURES
lIn addition to these specific disorders, an unlabeled category within each subgroup per-
mitted judges to list any other dysfunction they identified.
9-62393
THE FISHER-LOGEMANN TEST OF ARTICULATION COMPETENCE
/p /b /p /b /b /1",
/p, b/ 1. Pete's j o b was to keep the ba by hap._.ppy.
It /d /d It /d /t /t
/t, d/ 2. To day Dick tol d Patty about it.
| | @0r
/k, g/ 3. The g_iris were baking the biggest ca ke for Mr. Tag.
1~ /~ /~ /0 /0 /0
/o, ~1 4. Th.__..eirbrother wouldn't bathe because he th.__oughta bath would make his tooth..ache worse.
/t l{ /v /v /t /v /v
/f, vl 5. In a half day, he repaired fi ve television sets, two telephones, and a very old stove.
/s, z~ 6. Su zie sewed zippers on two new dresses at Bess ie's house.
/L s/
O@ 9 0 O
7. She usually rushes to push the garage door closed.
00 9 | 0
/tL as/ 8. George is at the church watching a magic show.
/w /r /l /r /t / w /t /r
/ r , 1, w / 9. t,Ve r_ode with Lucy around the tall tower in her new yellow car.
1~, /h I~, /h lh /J /h /J
/~,,j,h/ 10. Why haven't you looked anywh__ere behind the house or be .yond the hill yet?
/n /n /m /n /r) /m /tj /m /n
/m,n,~/ 11. N a n c y found some fine hangers am ong the m any things at the sale.
Figure 1. Representative completed record form of the Sentence Test, showing misarticulated consonant
phonemes circled.
phonemes, were analyzed. For this study, they were instructed not to note the
type of error produced by the patient but simply to identify each phoneme
misarticulated. Again, 20 samples were repeated for reliability measures. Intra-
judge agreement for this relatively simple listening test was 100% for both
judges, and interjudge agreement was also 100%.
RESULTS
Number oI % ol
Vocal Tract Disorder Patients Patients
Laryngeal disorders 178 89
Breathiness 30 15
Roughness 58 29
Hoarseness 90 45
Tremulousness 27 13.5
Other 0 0
Articulation disorder 90 45
Rate disorders 40 20
Repetition of syllables 31 15.5
Abnormally long syllables 12 6
Too-short syllables 21 10.5
Too-long pauses 4 2
Other 0 0
Hypernasality 20 10
No vocal tract disorder 22 11
tients. Disorders of speech rate appeared in 20%. Least frequent were distur-
bances of resonance (hypernasality), that occurred in only 10% of the patients.
U n i m p a i r e d vocal-tract control was seen in 11% of the Parkinson patients
studied. These figures reveal that the typical Parkinson patient is highly likely
to have a voice quality disorder and an approximately even chance of having
an articulation disturbance. But he is less likely to have problems with either
speech rate or resonance (a disorder of velar valving).
Specific P h o n e m e s Misarticulated. A record of each patient's consonant
misarticulations was prepared by each of the listener-judges. Neither the pre-
cise nature of each error nor the n u m b e r of errors per phoneme by a single
subject was specified. It was observed, however, that a misarticulated conso-
n a n t phoneme tended to be misarticulated with high consistency in this task.
Next, the n u m b e r of subjects misarticulating each phoneme was tallied,
and the frequency of errors for each phoneme in the total subject population
was entered on a descriptive feature matrix (Figure 2). A survey of the distri-
b u t i o n of errors on this feature matrix permits several immediate observations.
First, errors are highly concentrated in the obstruent consonants--stops,
fricatives, and affricates. T h e dysarthria most affects those consonant pho-
nemes requiring greatest constriction of the vocal tract in their production.
Second, an examination of cognate pairs, for instance, / p / - / b / or / f / - / v / ,
shows no difference in frequency of errors between the voiced and the voice-
less cognates.
Figure 2 shows that the deterioration in consonant production in these pa-
tients does not involve the voicing feature, b u t the m a n n e r and place features.
Such a simple count of error frequencies for the various phonemes discloses
the phoneme classes most affected by Parkinson's disease; yet these figures fail
M a n n e r of F o r m a t i o n
Place
of i_~ Stop Fricative Affricate Glide Lateral .'\'asa [
Articulation >- c
m
,~ .29 /~/:0
Bilabial ~ - - ~ ~
v i.
/bl :29,
.;_ . .
lwl'O /m/:6
Labio-dental J--'----~--
\: /v/'27
u /0/'16
Tip-dental -' ~ ~ 9
i\: /~/.16
Tip-alveolar
u I t / " -18
-
v / d / . 18 /(/:6; In/'6
Blade- ~ l /s/- 63
alveolar V "63
l--1 /.j/~0
9~ ~
8~
~o ~1~
c~
Data from the 200 patients then were replotted according to place features.
Table 2 shows data for a representative portion of the population studied (25
of the 200 patients). This plotting of the data according to place features
makes the clustering of articulation errors apparent. Note that those patients
having fewest error phonemes show errors on the / k / and /g/ phonemes.
These two back-velar stops were the only two phonemes solely affected, and
every patient with an articulatory disorder misarticulated / k / and /g/. The
alveolar fricatives /s/ and /z/ followed the / k / and /g/ in error frequency.
Next were the cognate prepalatal fricatives /J'/ and /5/, followed by the pre-
palatal affricates ~tf~ and /d3/. T h e labial phonemes, including the bi-
labial stops / p / and /b/ and the labiodental fricatives /f/ and /v/, were
affected less frequently than /t.f/ and /d3/. The least frequently misarticu-
lated phonemes were the tip-alveolar s t o p s / t / a n d / d / .
Classification of patients into four groups emerged from this analysis, based
on the pattern of cooccurrence of articulatory problems shown in Table 2.
First, only the back-tongue phonemes /k/ a n d / 9 / were misarticulated solely.
Thus, Group 1 includes 13.5% of the patients studied, who showed only this
back-tongue involvement and otherwise normal articulation. Group 2 includes
patients with tongue-blade dysfunction /s, z, f, 3, t f, ds/ as well as back-
tongue dysfunction. Seventeen percent of the patients showed involvement of
the tongue blade and back tongue, with all other articulations normal. T h e
third patient group defined includes those who displayed back tongue, blade
of tongue, and labial dysfunction. Five-and-one-half percent of the patients
showed dysfunction in these three areas of the vocal tract. The fourth group
of patients included those who misarticulated back tongue, tongue blade,
labial, and tongue-tip phonemes. Nine percent of the patients displayed this
cooccurrence of articulation symptoms.
Cooccurrence of Laryngeal Dys[unction with Articulatory Dys[unction. All
of the patients with articulation disorders were listed in order from fewest to
largest number of error phonemes, as illustrated in Table 2. For each patient
on this listing, notation was also made of any laryngeal dysfunction, reso-
nance disorder, or rate anomaly. Patients having one of these additional dis-
orders but no articulation dysfunctions were listed also. This listing revealed
a clear pattern of cooccurrence between laryngeal and articulatory dysfunc-
tions.
Of the total patient population, 89% demonstrated laryngeal dysfunction.
Further, 45% of the patients showed laryngeal dysfunction as the sole symp-
tom, with no articulation errors demonstrated. Every patient (except one 2)
who demonstrated any articulation problems also showed laryngeal dysfunc-
tion.
2This patient had undergone thalamic surgery approximately six years prior to this ex-
amination and therefore may not be typical of the Parkinson population. However, he may
also belong to a subgroup of Parkinson patients not represented in this study.
Percentage o]
Cooccurrence o] Vocal Tract Symptoms Patients
Laryngeal dysfunction 45
Posterior lingual dysfunction plus the above 13.5
Tongue blade dysfunction plus all the above 17
Labial dysfunction plus all the above 5.5
Tongue-tip dysfunction plus all the above 9
percent of patients were included in Group 2 with back-tongue /k/ and /9/
involvement in addition to laryngeal dysfunction, comprising hoarseness,
roughness, breathiness, and tremulousness. Group 3 included 17% of the pa-
tients. These individuals showed laryngeal, back tongue, and tongue-blade
dysfunction /s, z, f, 5, tf, ds/. Hoarseness was the only laryngeal symptom
noted in these patients. Patients in Group 4, including 5.5% of the population
studied showed laryngeal dysfunction (hoarseness), back-tongue involvement,
tongue-blade dysfunction, and labial misarticulations /p, b, f, v[. Group 5,
9% of the patients, included laryngeal dysfunction (hoarseness), and misartic-
ulations of the back tongue, tongue blade, lips, and tongue tip /t, d].
Cooccu~ence of Rate Disorders and Hypernasality with Articulatory and
Laryngeal Dysfunction. Rate disorders (20%) and hypernasality (10%) were
the least frequent speech symptoms in this population. Occurrence of these
symptoms followed no regular pattern of cooccurrence with the lingual, labial,
or laryngeal articulatory dysfunctions. Projected research in acoustic and
physiologic features of rate abnormalities in Parkinson patients may further
clarify possible relationships between the disfluency and articulatory dysfunc-
tions. The nature of Parkinson disfluencies and their possible cooccurrence
with other neurologic symptoms in the same patient, particularly gait and
tremor patterns, will be examined.
DISCUSSION
and reduction in lingual control may have lesions affecting control of Cranial
Nerves 11 and 12, while patients with only laryngeal dysfunction may have
neurologic lesion(s) involving control of C11 alone.
T h e fact that none of the 200 patients included in this study showed labial
dysfunction or lingual dysfunction as their sole vocal-tract disorder indicates
only that no such patients were included in this sample. It does not neces-
sarily indicate that such problems or patterns of problems do not exist in
Parkinson patients. Other Parkinson patients may show these dysfunctions as
their only vocal tract symptom.
Another interpretation of the data may be that these clusters of symptoms
represent a progression in dysfunction, beginning with laryngeal changes and
increasing to include other areas of neuromuscular control of the vocal tract,
for example, lips and tongue. Looking at the data in this way suggests that
deterioration in speech and voice in Parkinson patients begins with laryngeal
symptoms of breathiness or roughness, followed by disability in control of the
back of the tongue, and proceeding to anterior lingual place of articulation.
Labial articulations are affected some time after lingual control has started to
degenerate. This hypothesis of predictable progression of dysfunction remains
to be tested in a longitudinal study of a large group of Parkinsonian patients.
Changes in each patient's vocal-tract control over time could then be assessed
and any progressive degeneration corroborated.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
REFERENCES
ALLAN, C., TURNER, j., and GADEA-CIRIA, I., Investigations into speech disturbances following
stereotaxic surgery for Parkinsonism. Brit. J. Dis. Comm., 1, 55-59 (1966).
BIRKMAYER, W., and HORNYKIEWICZ,O., Der L-3, 4-Dioxyphenylalanin (Dopa) effect bei der
Parkinson akinese. Wien Min. Wehnschr., 73, 787-799 (1961).
CHIASSERINI,A., and CHIAPPETTA, F., Cooper's operation (chemothalemectomy) as a treatment
for Parkinsonism. Neurochirurgia, 7, 41-53 (1964).
DARLEY, F. L., ARONSON, A. E., and BROWN, j. R., Clusters of deviant speech dimensions in
the dysarthrias. ]. Speech Hearing Res., 12, 462-496 (1969a).
DARLEY, F. L., ARONSON, A. E., and BROWN, J. R., Differential diagnostic patterns of dys-
arthria. J. Speech Hearing Res., 12, 246--269 (1969b).
FASANO, V., Long term results in 250 patients with cryo-surgery and L-dopa. Third Sympo-
sium on Parkinson's Disease. In E. Livingstone and S. Livingstone (Eds.), 285--288 (1968).
FISHER, H. B., and LOGEMANN,J. A., The Fisher-Logemann Test of Articulation Competence.
Boston: Houghton-Mifflin (1971).
GREWEL, F., Dysarthria in post-encephalitic Parkinsonism. Acta psychiat, neurol, scand., 32,
440--449 (1957).
KAPLAN, H., MACnOVER, S., and RAmNER, A., A study of the effectiveness of drug therapy in
Parkinsonism. J. nerv. ment. Dis., 119, 398--411 (1954).
RICRODSKY, S., and MORRISON, E., Speech changes in Parkinsonism during L-Dopa therapy:
PreliminalT findings. J. Am. Geriat. Soc., 18, 142-151 (1970).
SAMRA, K., RIKLAN, M., LEVlTA, E., ZIMMERMAN,J., WALTZ, J., BERGMANN,L., and COOPER, I.,
Language and speech correlates of anatomically verified lesions in thalamic surgery for Par-
kinsonism. ]. Speech Hearing Res., 12, 510-540 (1969).
SARNO, M., Speech impairment in Parkinson's disease. Archs phys. Med. Rehabil., 49, 269-
275 (1968).
YAHR, M., DUVOIsIN, R., HOEiIM, M., SCHEAR, M., and BARRETT,R., L-Dopa: L-34-Dehydroxy-
phenylalaine. Its clinical effects on Parkinsonism. Trans. Am. neurol. Ass., 93, 56-63
(1968).
ZIMMERMAN, J., and CANE1ELD,W., Pre- and post-operative voice quality characteristics of pa-
tients with a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease. Paper prcsented at the Annual Convention
of the American Speech and Hearing Association, Washington, D.C. (1966).
APPENDIX
List of disorders for use by trained listeners in identifying vocal tract dysfunctions in
Parkinson patients.
Vocal Tract Disorders
if present
Laryngeal Disorders
Breathiness
Roughness
Hoarseness
Tremulousness
Reduced Pitch Range
Inappropriate Modal Speaking Pitch
Other
Rate Disorders
Repetition of Syllables
Abnormally Prolonged Syllables
Too-Short Syllables
Too-Long Pauses
Other
Hypernasality
Articulation Disorder
Other