Rapid Assessment of Subjective Hearing Complaints With a Modified Version of the Tinnitus and Hearing Survey.

Hearing difficulties are frequently reported by patients in audiology clinics, including patients with normal audiometric thresholds. However, because all individuals experience some difficulty understanding speech in noisy environments, it can be difficult to assess hearing complaints objectively across patients. Normative values help address this issue by providing an objective cutoff score for determining what is or is not clinically significant. The goal of this study was to establish normative values for the four-item hearing subscale of the Tinnitus and Hearing Survey (THS-H). Respondents completing the THS-H rate the level of difficulty understanding speech in the situations most commonly reported as being difficult: in the presence of noise, on TV or in movies, soft voices and group conversations. In this study, 22,583 US Service Members (SMs) completed the THS-H using an 11-point scale ranging from 0 (not a problem) to 10 (a very big problem). Responses to the four items were summed to produce values between 0 and 40. The distribution of the final scores was analyzed based on severity of hearing loss, age, and sex. Only 5% of SMs with clinically normal hearing scored above 27, so this score was selected as a cutoff for "clinically significant hearing problems." Due to its ease of administration and interpretation, the THS-H could be a useful tool for identifying patients with subjective hearing difficulty warranting audiological evaluation and management.

Prevalence of Self-Reported Bothersome Tinnitus in U.S. Army Soldiers From January 1, 2015, Through September 30, 2019.

PURPOSE: Tinnitus is a symptom of auditory dysfunction or injury and can be a precursor to permanent hearing loss. Tinnitus can interfere with communication, sleep, concentration, and mood; when this occurs, it is referred to as bothersome tinnitus. Annual hearing surveillance in the U.S. Army includes screening for bothersome tinnitus. Estimating the prevalence of self-reported bothersome tinnitus can facilitate prioritization of prevention and education efforts. The objective of this study was to examine Army hearing conservation data to estimate the prevalence of self-reported bothersome tinnitus as a function of age, hearing, sex, service component, and pay grade. METHOD: The study employed a cross-sectional, retrospective design. Records from 1,485,059 U.S. Army Soldiers retrieved from the Defense Occupational and Environmental Health Readiness System-Hearing Conservation were analyzed. Descriptive statistics and multinomial logistic regression analysis were used to estimate the prevalence of bothersome tinnitus and its associations with Soldiers' demographic characteristics. RESULTS: The estimated prevalence of self-reported bothersome tinnitus was 17.1% between January 1, 2015, and September 30, 2019; 13.6% of the Soldiers reported "bothered a little" and 3.5% reported "bothered a lot." Proportionally, the prevalence of self-reported bothersome tinnitus was higher for males, older Soldiers, and Reserve Component Soldiers. For every 1-year increase in age, the odds of self-reporting "bothered a little" tinnitus relative to "bothered not at all tinnitus" would be expected to increase by 2.2% (2.1%, 2.3%), and the odds of self-reporting "bothered a lot" tinnitus relative to "bothered not at all" tinnitus would be expected to increase by 3.6% (3.5%, 3.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The self-reported prevalence of bothersome tinnitus in the U.S. Army (17.1%) is substantially higher than that of the general population, where prevalence of bothersome tinnitus is estimated at 6.6%. Examination of bothersome tinnitus among Soldiers is an important step toward optimizing prevention, education, and intervention efforts.

Assessment methods for determining small changes in hearing performance over time.

Although the behavioral pure-tone threshold audiogram is considered the gold standard for quantifying hearing loss, assessment of speech understanding, especially in noise, is more relevant to quality of life but is only partly related to the audiogram. Metrics of speech understanding in noise are therefore an attractive target for assessing hearing over time. However, speech-in-noise assessments have more potential sources of variability than pure-tone threshold measures, making it a challenge to obtain results reliable enough to detect small changes in performance. This review examines the benefits and limitations of speech-understanding metrics and their application to longitudinal hearing assessment, and identifies potential sources of variability, including learning effects, differences in item difficulty, and between- and within-individual variations in effort and motivation. We conclude by recommending the integration of non-speech auditory tests, which provide information about aspects of auditory health that have reduced variability and fewer central influences than speech tests, in parallel with the traditional audiogram and speech-based assessments.

Evaluation of Extended-Wear Hearing Aids as a Solution for Intermittently Noise-Exposed Listeners With Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVES: Many individuals with noise-related hearing loss continue working in environments where they are periodically exposed to high levels of noise, which increases their risk for further hearing loss. These individuals often must remove their hearing aids in operational environments because of incompatibility with the mandated personal protective equipment, thus reducing situational awareness. Extended-wear hearing aids might provide a solution for these individuals because they can be worn for weeks or months at a time, protect users from high-level noise exposures, and are compatible with communication headsets, earmuffs, and other types of personal protective equipment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate localization ability and speech understanding, feasibility of fitting and use, and acceptability in terms of comfort in a population of noise-exposed, active duty Service members. DESIGN: Participants in the study were active duty Service members who were experienced hearing aid users and were currently using standard hearing aids bilaterally. Participants were fitted with extended-wear hearing aids for up to 14 weeks. Laboratory measures included functional gain, sound localization, and speech recognition (in quiet and in noise). Performance was compared between unaided, standard hearing aids, extended-wear hearing aids, and extended-wear hearing aids combined with a tactical communication device (3M Peltor ComTac). In addition, self-perceived benefit between extended-wear hearing aids and standard hearing aids was compared. RESULTS: The extended-wear hearing aids provided more attenuation of external sound when turned off compared to standard hearing aids. Speech understanding in quiet and in noise was comparable between extended-wear hearing aids and standard hearing aids and was better when a tactical communication device was worn in addition to extended-wear hearing aids. Localization with extended-wear hearing aids was the worst, intermediate with the standard hearing aids, and the best when the ears were unaided. The extended-wear hearing aids and standard hearing aids provided similar self-perceived communication benefits relative to unaided ears. Device failure and issues with extended-wear hearing aids fit and comfort contributed to a high participant withdrawal rate. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the hearing benefits of extended-wear hearing aids for Service members with hearing loss were comparable to those obtained with standard hearing aids, except for sound localization, which was poorer with extended-wear hearing aids. Extended-wear hearing aids provide the additional benefits of protecting the ears from high-level impulsive noise and being compatible with tactical communication and protection systems and other existing personal protective equipment and communication gear. The withdrawal rate in this study, however, suggests that extended-wear hearing aids may not be suitable for active duty Service members in locations where properly trained hearing professionals are not available to replace or re-insert extended-wear hearing aids when needed due to discomfort or device failure.

Functional impact of bothersome tinnitus on cognitive test performance.

OBJECTIVE: Individuals with bothersome tinnitus frequently report their concentration is affected. Given that tinnitus is the leading service-connected disability compensated by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, it is essential to determine whether tinnitus has a functional impact on the operational performance of Service members. Previous studies demonstrated that people with tinnitus perform more poorly on cognitive tests of selective attention and memory than those without tinnitus. This study aimed to compare performance between participants with and without tinnitus on visually based tests of selective attention (flanker task) and short-term memory (spatial letter location) that were self-administered under three auditory conditions (quiet, broadband noise and speech) using a tablet-based test protocol. DESIGN: Experimental. STUDY SAMPLE: Thirty participants with bothersome tinnitus and 30 control participants, matched for age and hearing loss. RESULTS: The results revealed a significantly larger flanker effect and shorter memory span in the tinnitus group compared to the control group, consistent with previous studies. Performance accuracy was comparable between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest bothersome tinnitus may affect cognitive efficiency more than cognitive performance. The tablet-based protocol has the potential to be implemented clinically as a functional measure of the impact of bothersome tinnitus on concentration.

Current Device-based Clinical Treatments for Tinnitus.

Device-based clinical treatments for tinnitus are predominantly sound based and include ear-level sound generators, hearing aids, cochlear implants, and tinnitus treatment devices. They are intended for patients with bothersome tinnitus. Bothersome tinnitus is characterized by problems with sleep, concentration, and mood. Most people with bothersome tinnitus have hearing loss and would benefit from amplification; however, not all patients are willing to use hearing aids. Tinnitus treatment devices are available to assist those who are not good candidates for amplification, and include devices used while sleeping and devices used for specified periods during the day.

Retrospective Assessment of the Efficacy of Modified Progressive Tinnitus Management Skills Education in a Military Medical Treatment Facility.

INTRODUCTION: The number-one service-connected disability is tinnitus. Tinnitus currently has no cure, but the functional impact of tinnitus has been shown to be mitigated by Progressive Tinnitus Management (PTM), a multi-level management approach. The duration of PTM Level 3 skills education (PTM-SE) and the inclusion of mental health providers have been identified as barriers to implementation of PTM-SE in Department of Defense (DOD) medical treatment facilities. The goal of this study was to determine if a version of PTM-SE modified for use in DOD medical treatment facilities resulted in positive changes in tinnitus-related outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted by examining the medical records of patients who attended modified PTM-SE appointments. The study was approved by the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center Institutional Review Board. The study sample included 130 patients who completed modified PTM-SE between January 2015 and June 2016. Primary outcome measures were tinnitus awareness and tinnitus annoyance; secondary outcome measures were effect on life and self-perceived coping ability. Outcome measures were analyzed with nonparametric statistics and logistic regression. RESULTS: Modified PTM-SE resulted in clinically significant improvements in the primary outcome measures (awareness, p < 0.0001; annoyance, p < 0.0001). The proportion of patients who indicated an improvement in coping with tinnitus was similar to other published data with similar modifications to PTM-SE. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence supports the assumption that PTM is a flexible program of tinnitus management that even when modified to be suitable for use in a DOD medical treatment facility provides meaningful reductions in tinnitus awareness and annoyance and improves tinnitus coping ability among military beneficiaries. These findings should encourage audiologists to modify PTM to work within their military medical treatment facility.

Intra- and Intersubject Variability in Audiometric Measures and Loudness Judgments in Older Listeners with Normal Hearing.

This research was to document intra- and intersubject variability in measures of pure tone thresholds, loudness discomfort levels, and the Contour test of loudness for tonal and speech stimuli across 8 to 10 repeated test sessions over a period of almost 1 year in a group of 11 normal-hearing, older middle-aged adults (39 to 73 years, mean of 56 years). The measured pure tone thresholds and loudness discomfort levels were determined to be stable across sessions, with variability on the order of 5 dB. The categorical judgments for the Contour test for both warbled tones and spondaic speech stimuli decreased over time in level required for categories greater than comfortable. This result contrasts with reports of a slight increase over time when young, normal-hearing adults were tested in comparable measures. The intrasubject variability in the Contour test results was greatest for the 4,000-Hz tonal stimulus for which the largest time effects were observed. The intersubject variability was typically greater than the intrasubject variability and typically increased as the loudness category increased, with some exceptions. The results from this study can be used to aid in power and sample size analyses using these measures in future studies designed to compare effects of treatments based on changes in loudness judgments over time.

Considerations in the Development of a Sound Tolerance Interview and Questionnaire Instrument.

Most clinicians approach the objective fitting of hearing aids with three goals in mind: audibility, comfort, and tolerance. When these three amplification goals have been met, the hearing aid user is more likely to adapt to and perceive benefit from hearing aid use. However, problems related to the loudness of sounds and reduced sound tolerance, which may or may not be reported by the aided user, can adversely impact adaptation to amplification and the individual's quality of life. Although there are several standardized questionnaires available to evaluate hearing aid benefit and satisfaction, there is no standardized questionnaire or interview tool for evaluating reduced sound tolerance and the related impact on hearing aid use. We describe a 36-item tool, the Sound Tolerance Questionnaire (STQ), consisting of six sections, including experience with hearing aids, sound sensitivity/intolerance, medical and noise exposure histories, coexisting tinnitus problems, and a final question to differentiate the primary and secondary problems related to sound intolerance, tinnitus, and hearing loss. In its current format as a research tool, the STQ was sensitive in pinpointing vague sound tolerance complaints not reported by the study participants in eligibility screening by Formby et al. A refined version of the STQ, the Sound Tolerance Interview and Questionnaire Instrument (STIQI), structured as a two-part tool, is presented in the appendix for prospective clinical use. The STIQI has potential utility to delineate factors contributing to loudness complaints and/or reduced sound tolerance in individuals considering hearing aid use, as well as those who have been unsuccessful hearing aid users secondary to loudness complaints or sound intolerance. The STIQI, when validated and refined, also may hold promise for predicting hearing aid benefit and/or assessing treatment-related change over time of hearing aid use or interventions designed to remediate problems of loudness and/or sound intolerance among hearing aid candidates or users.

Relations among Auditory Brainstem and Middle Latency Response Measures, Categorical Loudness Judgments, and Their Associated Physical Intensities.

This study characterizes changes in response properties of toneburst-evoked auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) and/or middle latency responses (MLRs) as a function of perceived loudness and physical intensity of these stimuli and delineates the range of levels corresponding to categorical loudness judgments for these stimuli. ABRs/MLRs were recorded simultaneously to 500- and 2,000-Hz tonebursts in 10 normal-hearing adults at levels corresponding to each listener's loudness judgments for four categories on Contour Test of Loudness. Group mean ABR wave V and MLR wave Pa latency values increased significantly as loudness judgments decreased. Group mean amplitude values for ABR wave V-V' and MLR wave Na-Pa increased as the listeners' categorical judgments increased. Listeners assigned a broad range (30 to 40 dB) of stimulus intensities when judging loudness of these stimuli within a specific loudness category. This was true for all four loudness categories and both frequencies. Thus, it appears that tone-evoked ABR/MLR response measures reflect, in part, the listener's perception of loudness. Response latencies are a more sensitive indicator of listener's loudness percept than corresponding response amplitudes. An appreciable range of signal levels was judged to be categorically equivalent across listeners. Thus, limiting how loudness judgments can be applied to prescriptive hearing aid fittings in individuals who cannot provide accurate loudness judgments.

Auditory Brainstem and Middle Latency Responses Measured Pre- and Posttreatment for Hyperacusic Hearing-Impaired Persons Successfully Treated to Improve Sound Tolerance and to Expand the Dynamic Range for Loudness: Case Evidence.

In this report of three cases, we consider electrophysiologic measures from three hyperacusic hearing-impaired individuals who, prior to treatment to expand their dynamic ranges for loudness, were problematic hearing aid candidates because of their diminished sound tolerance and reduced dynamic ranges. Two of these individuals were treated with structured counseling combined with low-level broadband sound therapy from bilateral sound generators and the third case received structured counseling in combination with a short-acting placebo sound therapy. Each individual was highly responsive to his or her assigned treatment as revealed by expansion of the dynamic range by at least 20 dB at one or more frequencies posttreatment. Of specific interest in this report are their latency and amplitude measures taken from tone burst-evoked auditory brainstem response (ABR) and cortically derived middle latency response (MLR) recordings, measured as a function of increasing loudness at 500 and 2,000 Hz pre- and posttreatment. The resulting ABR and MLR latency and amplitude measures for each case are considered here in terms of pre- and posttreatment predictions. The respective pre- and posttreatment predictions anticipated larger pretreatment response amplitudes and shorter pretreatment response latencies relative to typical normal control values and smaller normative-like posttreatment response amplitudes and longer posttreatment response latencies relative to the corresponding pretreatment values for each individual. From these results and predictions, we conjecture about the neural origins of the hyperacusis conditions (i.e., brainstem versus cortical) and the neuronal sites responsive to treatment. The only consistent finding in support of the pre- and posttreatment predictions and, thus, the strongest index of hyperacusis and positive treatment-related effects was measured for MLR latency responses for wave Pa at 2,000 Hz. Other response indices, including ABR wave V latency and wave V-V' amplitude and MLR wave Na-Pa amplitude for 500 and 2,000 Hz, appear either ambiguous across and/or within these individuals. Notwithstanding significant challenges for interpreting these findings, including associated confounding effects of their sensorineural hearing losses and differences in the presentation levels of the toneburst stimuli used to collect these measures for each individual, our limited analyses of three cases suggest measures of MLR wave Pa latency at 2,000 Hz (reflecting cortical contributions) may be a promising objective indicator of hyperacusis and dynamic range expansion treatment effects.

A Sound Therapy-Based Intervention to Expand the Auditory Dynamic Range for Loudness among Persons with Sensorineural Hearing Losses: Case Evidence Showcasing Treatment Efficacy.

Case evidence is presented that highlights the clinical relevance and significance of a novel sound therapy-based treatment. This intervention has been shown to be efficacious in a randomized controlled trial for promoting expansion of the dynamic range for loudness and increased sound tolerance among persons with sensorineural hearing losses. Prior to treatment, these individuals were unable to use aided sound effectively because of their limited dynamic ranges. These promising treatment effects are shown in this article to be functionally significant, giving rise to improved speech understanding and enhanced hearing aid benefit and satisfaction, and, in turn, to enhanced quality of life posttreatment. These posttreatment sound therapy effects also are shown to be sustained, in whole or part, with aided environmental sound and to be dependent on specialized counseling to maximize treatment benefit. Importantly, the treatment appears to be efficacious for hearing-impaired persons with primary hyperacusis (i.e., abnormally reduced loudness discomfort levels [LDLs]) and for persons with loudness recruitment (i.e., LDLs within the typical range), which suggests the intervention should generalize across most individuals with reduced dynamic ranges owing to sensorineural hearing loss. An exception presented in this article is for a person describing the perceptual experience of pronounced loudness adaptation, which apparently rendered the sound therapy inaudible and ineffectual for this individual. Ultimately, these case examples showcase the enormous potential of a surprisingly simple sound therapy intervention, which has utility for virtually all audiologists to master and empower the adaptive plasticity of the auditory system to achieve remarkable treatment benefits for large numbers of individuals with sensorineural hearing losses.

A Sound Therapy-Based Intervention to Expand the Auditory Dynamic Range for Loudness among Persons with Sensorineural Hearing Losses: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial.

The primary aim of this research was to evaluate the validity, efficacy, and generalization of principles underlying a sound therapy-based treatment for promoting expansion of the auditory dynamic range (DR) for loudness. The basic sound therapy principles, originally devised for treatment of hyperacusis among patients with tinnitus, were evaluated in this study in a target sample of unsuccessfully fit and/or problematic prospective hearing aid users with diminished DRs (owing to their elevated audiometric thresholds and reduced sound tolerance). Secondary aims included: (1) delineation of the treatment contributions from the counseling and sound therapy components to the full-treatment protocol and, in turn, the isolated treatment effects from each of these individual components to intervention success; and (2) characterization of the respective dynamics for full, partial, and control treatments. Thirty-six participants with bilateral sensorineural hearing losses and reduced DRs, which affected their actual or perceived ability to use hearing aids, were enrolled in and completed a placebo-controlled (for sound therapy) randomized clinical trial. The 2 × 2 factorial trial design was implemented with or without various assignments of counseling and sound therapy. Specifically, participants were assigned randomly to one of four treatment groups (nine participants per group), including: (1) group 1-full treatment achieved with scripted counseling plus sound therapy implemented with binaural sound generators; (2) group 2-partial treatment achieved with counseling and placebo sound generators (PSGs); (3) group 3-partial treatment achieved with binaural sound generators alone; and (4) group 4-a neutral control treatment implemented with the PSGs alone. Repeated measurements of categorical loudness judgments served as the primary outcome measure. The full-treatment categorical-loudness judgments for group 1, measured at treatment termination, were significantly greater than the corresponding pretreatment judgments measured at baseline at 500, 2,000, and 4,000 Hz. Moreover, increases in their "uncomfortably loud" judgments (∼12 dB over the range from 500 to 4,000 Hz) were superior to those measured for either of the partial-treatment groups 2 and 3 or for control group 4. Efficacy, assessed by treatment-related criterion increases ≥ 10 dB for judgments of uncomfortable loudness, was superior for full treatment (82% efficacy) compared with that for either of the partial treatments (25% and 40% for counseling combined with the placebo sound therapy and sound therapy alone, respectively) or for the control treatment (50%). The majority of the group 1 participants achieved their criterion improvements within 3 months of beginning treatment. The treatment effect from sound therapy was much greater than that for counseling, which was statistically indistinguishable in most of our analyses from the control treatment. The basic principles underlying the full-treatment protocol are valid and have general applicability for expanding the DR among individuals with sensorineural hearing losses, who may often report aided loudness problems. The positive full-treatment effects were superior to those achieved for either counseling or sound therapy in virtual or actual isolation, respectively; however, the delivery of both components in the full-treatment approach was essential for an optimum treatment outcome.

Estimates of loudness, loudness discomfort, and the auditory dynamic range: normative estimates, comparison of procedures, and test-retest reliability.

The purpose of this series of experiments was to establish normative reference values for absolute and relative judgements of loudness discomfort and for the auditory dynamic range (DR), and to evaluate intersubject variability and intra-subject test-retest reliability for the respective measures of loudness discomfort. To establish the normal auditory DR, audiometric thresholds and loudness discomfort levels (LDLs) were measured from a group of 59 normal-hearing adults without sound tolerance problems. The resulting estimates of the LDL and DR were on the order of 100 dB HL and 95 dB, respectively. A subset (n = 18) of this larger group participated in further studies in which loudness growth functions and the upper limit of the auditory DR were measured by categorical scaling judgments. The findings revealed no significant differences between the test methods for absolute (LDL) and relative (categorical scaling) judgements of loudness discomfort, intersubject variability, or intrasubject test-retest reliability, and suggest that the simple LDL estimate of loudness discomfort is an efficient and valid clinical measure for characterizing the "threshold of discomfort."