Direct Comparison of Three Commercially Available Devices for Voice Ambulatory Monitoring and Biofeedback Purpose: To provide a direct comparison of three commercially available devices for voice ambulatory monitoring and biofeedback to assist voice clinicians and researchers in choosing the device that best meets their needs. Methods: The Ambulatory Phonation Monitor (APM), VocaLog, and VoxLog were descriptively compared regarding cost, availability, physical characteristics, and ... Article
Article  |   July 01, 2014
Direct Comparison of Three Commercially Available Devices for Voice Ambulatory Monitoring and Biofeedback
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Jarrad H. Van Stan
    Center for Laryngeal Surgery & Voice Rehabilitation, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
    Center for Interprofessional Studies & Innovation, MGH Institute of Health Professions, Charlestown, MA
  • Joakim Gustafsson
    Division of Speech & Language Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Intervention & Technology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
  • Ellika Schalling
    Division of Speech and Language Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Intervention & Technology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
    Department of Speech and Language Pathology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
  • Robert E. Hillman
    Center for Laryngeal Surgery & Voice Rehabilitation, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
    Communication Sciences & Disorders, MGH Institute of Health Professions, Charlestown, MA
    Department of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
  • Disclosure: Financial: Robert E. Hillman has a financial interest in the Ambulatory Phonation Monitor based on a contractual agreement between Sensimetrics, Inc. (R&D for the initial version of the Ambulatory Phonation Monitor) and KayPENTAX, Inc. (manufacturer of the Ambulatory Phonation Monitor). Jarrad H. Van Stan, Joakim Gustafsson, and Ellika Schalling have no financial interests to disclose.
    Disclosure: Financial: Robert E. Hillman has a financial interest in the Ambulatory Phonation Monitor based on a contractual agreement between Sensimetrics, Inc. (R&D for the initial version of the Ambulatory Phonation Monitor) and KayPENTAX, Inc. (manufacturer of the Ambulatory Phonation Monitor). Jarrad H. Van Stan, Joakim Gustafsson, and Ellika Schalling have no financial interests to disclose.×
  • Nonfinancial: Jarrad H. Van Stan, Joakim Gustafsson, Ellika Schalling, and Robert E. Hillman have no nonfinancial interests to disclose.
    Nonfinancial: Jarrad H. Van Stan, Joakim Gustafsson, Ellika Schalling, and Robert E. Hillman have no nonfinancial interests to disclose.×
Article Information
Speech, Voice & Prosodic Disorders / Voice Disorders / Speech, Voice & Prosody / Articles
Article   |   July 01, 2014
Direct Comparison of Three Commercially Available Devices for Voice Ambulatory Monitoring and Biofeedback
SIG 3 Perspectives on Voice and Voice Disorders, July 2014, Vol. 24, 80-86. doi:10.1044/vvd24.2.80
SIG 3 Perspectives on Voice and Voice Disorders, July 2014, Vol. 24, 80-86. doi:10.1044/vvd24.2.80

Purpose: To provide a direct comparison of three commercially available devices for voice ambulatory monitoring and biofeedback to assist voice clinicians and researchers in choosing the device that best meets their needs.

Methods: The Ambulatory Phonation Monitor (APM), VocaLog, and VoxLog were descriptively compared regarding cost, availability, physical characteristics, and operational features; and quantitatively compared regarding measures of loudness (dB sound pressure level [SPL]), pitch (fundamental frequency – F0), and phonation time. The quantitative comparison used simultaneous registrations acquired during a 90-minute lecture which also included a Smartphone-based system designed to capture the raw voice signal as a reference.

Results: Differences regarding cost, physical characteristics, and operational features could influence device choice. All three devices register SPL and phonation time, and also biofeedback based on SPL. Furthermore, the APM and VoxLog provide monitoring and biofeedback for F0 with the associated capability of providing additional measures related to vocal dose. All devices produced comparable results for common measures, except for the overestimation of phonation time by the VocaLog.

Conclusions: The cost, operational features, and performance characteristics of the three commercially available devices for voice ambulatory monitoring and biofeedback differ in ways that can significantly impact decisions about which one is best suited for a particular application.

Become a SIG Affiliate
Pay Per View
Entire SIG 3 Perspectives on Voice and Voice Disorders content & archive
24-hour access
This Issue
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access
We've Changed Our Publication Model...
The 19 individual SIG Perspectives publications have been relaunched as the new, all-in-one Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups.