PURPOSE: to investigate the voice impact on life quality of teachers and compare results with the Speech-Language evaluation. Methods: 21 university teachers took part, 77% women and 23% men, with mean age of 48 years, who filled in the Quality of Life and Voice Protocol (QLV), and were shot for the Speech-Language evaluation in the body and vocal aspects. RESULTS: the docents classified their voices as good (42.85%), reasonable (38.09%) and very good and bad, equally (9.52%). The Physical Domain showed average score: 78.18, highlighting the difficulty of speaking loud or being listened in noisy environments, problems at work or to develop career because of voice. In the Social-Emotional Domain the average score was 88.98 and showed anxiety or frustration due to voice. The Global Domain had an average of 82.61. In the Speech-Language evaluation more adapted (61.90%) than altered (38.09%) voices were noted, with these last ones showing restriction in projection and modulation or hoarseness. The comparison among vocal self-evaluation, Speech-Language evaluation and life quality showed more consensus than divergences. CONCLUSION: it is concluded that the voice impact on the life quality was low and there was consistency between QLV results and Speech-Language evaluation, indicating appropriate perception from the docents of their own voices. The QLV showed predictive value in the relation between voice and life quality and can be indicated as a valuable instrument when utilized along with other research strategies.
Voice Disorders; Faculty; Quality of Life
