Reliability of Hypernasality Rating

Objective: To compare reliability in auditory-perceptual assessment of hypernasality for 3 different methods and to explore the influence of language background. Design: Comparative methodological study. Participants and Materials: Audio recordings of 5-year-old Swedish-speaking children with repaired cleft lip and palate consisting of 73 stimuli of 9 nonnasal single-word strings in 3 different randomized orders. Four experienced speech-language pathologists (2 native speakers of Brazilian–Portuguese and 2 native speakers of Swedish) participated as listeners. After individual training, each listener performed the hypernasality rating task. Each order of stimuli was analyzed individually using the 2-step, VISOR and Borg centiMax scale methods. Main Outcome Measures: Comparison of intra- and inter-rater reliability, and consistency for each method within language of the listener and between listener languages (Swedish and Brazilian–Portuguese). Results: Good to excellent intra-rater reliability was found within each listener for all methods, 2-step: κ = 0.59-0.93; VISOR: intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.80-0.99; Borg centiMax (cM) scale: ICC = 0.80-1.00. The highest inter-rater reliability was demonstrated for VISOR (ICC = 0.60-0.90) and Borg cM-scale (ICC = 0.40-0.80). High consistency within each method was found with the highest for the Borg cM scale (ICC = 0.89-0.91). There was a significant difference in the ratings between the Swedish and the Brazilian listeners for all methods. Conclusions: The category-ratio scale Borg cM was considered most reliable in the assessment of hypernasality. Language background of Brazilian–Portuguese listeners influenced the perceptual ratings of hypernasality in Swedish speech samples, despite their experience in perceptual assessment of cleft palate speech disorders.