不同嗓音需求下雾化用于嗓音的运用：范围综述

文献信息

中文摘要

目的： 梳理关于雾化及其他水合策略在不同嗓音需求下用于嗓音的现有证据，重点关注干预特征、结局指标和已报告的效果。
研究设计： 范围综述。
方法： 本范围综述按照乔安娜布里格斯研究所（JBI）方法学进行，并依据PRISMA-ScR指南报告。方案已在开放科学框架（Open Science Framework）注册（DOI：10.17605/OSF.IO/T8XVE）。检索在PubMed、Scopus和Cochrane Library中进行，不限制年份或语言。纳入涉及成人并研究雾化或水合策略用于嗓音的研究。数据提取涵盖研究特征、干预方案和嗓音结局。结果采用描述性分析和结局映射进行综合。
结果： 共纳入10项研究。大多数研究为准实验性研究，涉及健康参与者。最常见的干预为表面水合（40%），其次为生理盐水雾化（20%）、全身水合（20%）和联合策略（20%）。声学结局是最常使用的指标（90%），其次是听觉感知测量（60%）和空气动力学测量（40%）。生理盐水雾化显示出最一致的正向结果，尤其是在声学和感知结局方面。表面水合策略也主要显示出正向效果，而全身水合的发现一致性较低。空气动力学结局在各研究间变异较大。总体而言，结果具有异质性，并受到干预方案、溶液类型和设备特征差异的影响。
结论： 现有证据提示，生理盐水雾化和表面水合可能与部分嗓音结局的改善相关，尤其是声学和感知测量方面。然而，由于样本量小、方法学局限以及研究间存在显著异质性，这些发现应谨慎解读。当前证据不足以确定最佳雾化方案，也不足以确定其在不同嗓音人群中的疗效。未来的对照研究应优先采用标准化干预方案、详细描述气溶胶递送特征以及多维结局评估。

英文摘要

OBJECTIVE: To map the available evidence on nebulization and other hydration strategies for voice across different vocal demands, focusing on intervention characteristics, outcomes, and reported effects.
STUDY DESIGN: Scoping review.
METHODS: This scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology and reported according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework (DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/T8XVE). Searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library without restrictions on year or language. Studies involving adults and investigating nebulization or hydration strategies for voice were included. Data extraction covered study characteristics, intervention protocols, and vocal outcomes. Results were synthesized using descriptive analysis and mapping of outcomes.
RESULTS: Ten studies were included. Most studies were quasi-experimental and involved healthy participants. The most frequent interventions were surface hydration (40%), followed by nebulization with saline solution (20%), systemic hydration (20%), and combined strategies (20%). Acoustic outcomes were the most frequently used (90%), followed by auditory perceptual measures (60%) and aerodynamic measures (40%). Nebulization with saline solution demonstrated the most consistent positive results, particularly in acoustic and perceptual outcomes. Surface hydration strategies also showed predominantly positive effects, while systemic hydration presented less consistent findings. Aerodynamic outcomes were more variable across studies. Overall, the results were heterogeneous and influenced by differences in intervention protocols, solution types, and device characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence suggests that saline nebulization and surface hydration may be associated with improvements in selected vocal outcomes, particularly acoustic and perceptual measures. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously because of the small samples, methodological limitations, and substantial heterogeneity across studies. Current evidence is insufficient to establish an optimal nebulization protocol or determine its efficacy across different vocal populations. Future controlled studies should prioritize standardized intervention protocols, detailed characterization of aerosol delivery, and multidimensional outcome assessment.