Tracheoesophageal voice devices are thought to only last three months

Tracheoesophageal voice devices have been reported to have a smaller life span than first anticipated.

What was thought to be at least a six month life span recently turned out to be only three months. This is a cause for concern as it could cause greater healthcare costs and a burden for the users who need to keep replacing them.

The device is being used for cancer patients or those who have been affected by radiation damage, consequently having their voice box removed. The silicone device assists those individuals to speak. It allows the oesophagus to vibrate which gives them a voice. However, it is not all great news as their longevity has recently come into question as a response to a recent study. Jan Lewin, at the University of Texas Anderson Cancer Centre, said:

“…voice prostheses should last at least six months and even more ideally, up to one year.”

But then he continued to say that they lasted three months, on average.

Research

The research was based on 390 patients who had a total of 3,648 devices installed and removed. It was found that 70% were removed caused by a leakage through the valve.

It’s disappointing that the manufacturers providing the devices have not yet found a suitable solution to the durability issue. It’s common knowledge that that the devices need changing, but half the expected lifespan is quite a drop. You can only imagine how burdensome that would be on the users. Indwelling devices require a clinician to implement the device which causes further distress and distraction to the users’ daily lives, and further cost to the health service as well.

There are also technical problems with the device. If the users do not manage the device properly, saliva and food can get into the windpipe which can cause problems with the respiratory system. Research suggests that the short life span cold be due to the intensive treatment that the patients undergo, which could further complicate management of the devices.

Further, some may argue that the small number of head and neck cancer patients using the devices could be a factor to their short life span. This could be because they have not had a large market audience to develop a more efficient product. Reuters Health estimates the patients using the device to be between the range of 3,000 to 4,000 a year. However, it could be argued that due to the niche market, it creates enough space to research and develop a device that is tailored to last.

Getting them replaced is usually not covered by insurance plans, therefore forking out tri-monthly for the devices could turn out to be a costly burden on users. It’s important for patients to consider the costs prior to them having the puncture as they may be left with a surprisingly huge bill that they did not initially factor in.