Objetivos: Determinar e comparar os valores de nasalância em amostras de fala na presença e ausência da turbulência nasal (TN) e da hipernasalidade. Métodos: Foram analisadas um total de 288 amostras de fala com fonemas de alta e baixa pressão, sendo que, 110 foram excluídas por apresentarem articulação compensatória (AC) ou disfonia. Cinco (5) juízes avaliaram as 178 amostras (110 + 20%) para indicar a presença e ausência da TN e da hipernasalidade. Resultados: As palavras e frases contendo fonemas líquidos (baixa pressão) foram julgados, por todos os juízes, com ausência de TN, e não foi encontrada diferença significante entre as amostras analisadas (lalá, lalá olhou a lua, e frases LO). No caso das 5 amostras com fonemas de alta pressão (papai, bebê, papai pediu pipoca, o bebê babou, frases PO) observou-se que somente nas frases PO a diferença foi estatisticamente significante (p=0,02) para o fator hipernasalidade. Conclusão: Comparando os valores de nasalância na presença e ausência da TN podemos concluir que a nasalância apresentou-se elevada em todas as palavras e frases contendo fonemas orais de alta pressão, porém a diferenças encontradas não foram estatisticamente significantes. Comparando os valores de nasalância na presença e ausência da hipernasalidade notamos que os valores apresentaram-se elevados nas palavras e frases contendo fonemas orais sonoros de alta pressão e nas frases LO.

Objective:The objective of this study was to determine and to compare nasalance scores at the presence and absence of nasal turbulence (NT) and hypernasality. Methods: Nasometric scores and audio recordings were obtained simultaneously from 30 participants with operated unilateral cleft lip and palate during production of speech samples with low and high pressure phonemes. From a sample of 288 recording, 110 were excluded when rated with presence of compensatory articulation (CA) or dysphonia by a group of 5 judges and the remaining 110 sample were classified according to the presence or absence of NT and hypernasality and their mean nasalance scores were calculated. Results: Intra-rater agreement between the judges ranged from regular to perfect and inter-rater agreement ranged from moderate to substancial. The words and phrases with low pressure phonemes (lalá, lalá olhou a lua e low pressure phrases) were rated by all judges with absence of NT. All nasalance scores for low pressure phonemes were found to be suggestive of the presence of hypernasality for the samples rated as hypernasal. There was no significant difference between the nasalance scores for all low pressure samples analysed (lalá, lalá olhou a lua and other low pressure phrases). The nasalance scores for high pressure phonemes (papai, bebê, papai pediu pipoca, o bebê babou, phrases high pressure) were found to be suggestive of the presence of hypernasality for the samples rated as hypernasal and also when the samples were rated with presence of NT. There was significant difference between the nasalance scores only for the high pressure phrases (p=0,02). Conclusion: While statistically significant higher nasalance scores were found only for the longer speech sample of high pressure phrases, elevated nasalance scores were observed for all samples rated with presence hypernasality or presence of NT suggesting the importance, during clinical practice, of carefully interpreting nasalance scores at the presence of turbulence.