The Importance of Mitochondrial Disease Testing in Young Adults With New Onset Sensorineural Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVES: Sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) occurs commonly as part of mitochondriopathies and varies in severity and onset. In this study, we characterized hearing with specific consideration for hearing loss as a potential early indicator of mitochondrial disease (MD). We hypothesize that genetic testing at the earliest detection of SNHL may lead to an earlier MD diagnosis. DESIGN: We reviewed the clinical and audiometric data of 49 patients undergoing genetic testing for MD. RESULTS: One-third of individuals with molecularly confirmed MD presented with SNHL. On average, patients had hearing loss at least 10 years before genetic testing. The collective audiometric profile includes mild to moderate SNHL at lower frequencies and moderate SNHL at 2 kHz and higher frequencies. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that screening for SNHL could be an early indicator of MD. We propose that the audiometric profile for those with a MD diagnosis may have clinical triage utility.

AI model for predicting adult cochlear implant candidacy using routine behavioral audiometry.

OBJECTIVE: To describe an AI model to facilitate adult cochlear implant candidacy prediction based on basic demographical data and standard behavioral audiometry. METHODS: A machine-learning approach using retrospective demographic and audiometric data to predict candidacy CNC word scores and AzBio sentence in quiet scores was performed at a tertiary academic center. Data for the model were derived from adults completing cochlear implant candidacy testing between January 2011 and March 2023. Comparison of the prediction model to other published prediction tools and benchmarks was performed. RESULTS: The final dataset included 770 adults, encompassing 1045 AzBio entries, and 1373 CNC entries. Isophoneme scores and word recognition scores exhibited strongest importance to both the CNC and AzBio prediction models, followed by standard pure tone average and low-frequency pure tone average. The mean absolute difference between the predicted and actual score was 15 percentage points for AzBio sentences in quiet and 13 percentage points for CNC word scores, approximating anticipated test-retest constraints inherent to the variables incorporated into the model. Our final combined model achieved an accuracy of 87 % (sensitivity: 90 %; precision: 80 %). CONCLUSION: We present an adaptive AI model that predicts adult cochlear implant candidacy based on routine behavioral audiometric and basic demographical data. Implementation efforts include a public-facing online prediction tool and accompanying smartphone program, an embedded notification flag in the electronic medical record to alert providers of potential candidates, and a program to retrospectively engage past patients who may be eligible for cochlear implantation based on audiogram results.

Rethinking the clinical utility of distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) signal-to-noise ratio.

OBJECTIVE: Distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) levels are repeatable over time in normal-hearing individuals making DPOAE levels an ideal measurement for monitoring cochlear status in clinic and research applications. However, if DPOAE signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) values instead of levels are used for monitoring, the repeatability of this value needs to be established. This retrospective, cross-sectional study sought to determine DPOAE SNR repeatability in younger children, older children, young adults and a patient population with normal hearing. DESIGN: Each participant attended four sessions where DPOAE discrete frequency sweeps were collected at conventional (≤ 8 kHz) and/or extended-high frequencies (> 8 kHz). To examine the extent of variability to be expected for DPOAE SNR, average absolute SNR differences-between-trials were determined and compared to average absolute DPOAE level differences-between-trials. STUDY SAMPLES: One hundred forty-five participants, incorporating four different groups from three different studies. Ages ranged from 3 to 55 years. RESULTS: Average SNR differences-between-trials across all frequencies are greater than differences for average DPOAE levels. Improved calibration methods result in SNR differences-between-trials that are similar across all frequencies. CONCLUSIONS: When monitoring cochlear health over an extended bandwidth, DPOAE levels are less variable across trials than SNR values, thus allowing earlier indicators of cochlear damage.

Electrical stimulation of the cochlea for treatment of chronic disabling tinnitus: an open-label trial towards the development of an implantable device.

BACKGROUND: Chronic tinnitus affects millions of people globally and constitutes the most commonly compensated disability among military service members in the United States. Existing treatment options largely surround helping patients cope with their disease as opposed to directly suppressing tinnitus perception. The current study investigated the efficacy of electrical stimulation of the cochlea on chronic disabling tinnitus. METHODS: In this single-arm, open-label clinical trial, 22 adult subjects with severe-range asymmetric or unilateral non-pulsatile tinnitus underwent electrical stimulation of the cochlea through use of an extra-cochlear electrode positioned on the cochlear promontory. Each subject underwent 3 stimulation treatments over 3 weeks at 7-day intervals. Tinnitus severity was determined by Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI), and Tinnitus Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Inclusion criteria required subjects have no worse than moderate sensorineural hearing loss determined by pre-enrollment audiometric testing. The primary outcome was nadir post-treatment THI scores, obtained at seven timepoints following electrical stimulation, with clinically significant improvement defined as a decrease of ≥ 7. RESULTS: All 22 (100%) subjects experienced clinically significant improvement in the THI during the study period with a mean decrease in scores of - 31 (95% CI - 38 to - 25) from a baseline of 48. Twenty (91%) experienced clinically significant improvement detectable on at least two of the three tinnitus survey instruments and 17 (77%) experienced clinically significant improvement detectable on all three survey instruments (i.e., THI, TFI, and VAS). Eight (36%) subjects reported either complete (THI of 0; n = 3) or near-complete (THI 1-4; n = 5) suppression of their tinnitus following a stimulation session. Thirteen (59%) subjects reported a nadir following stimulation at or below the threshold for "no or slight handicap" on the THI (≤ 16). No adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: These findings establish the foundation for the development of an extra-cochlear implantable device that delivers electrical stimulation to the cochlea for the treatment of disabling tinnitus. For patients considering device implantation, trans-tympanic cochlear promontory stimulation can facilitate patient selection. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03759834. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03759834.

The influence of self-reported noise exposure on 2ƒ1-ƒ2 distortion product otoacoustic emission level, fine structure, and components in a normal-hearing population.

Distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) offer an outcome measure to consider for clinical detection and monitoring outer hair cell dysfunction as a result of noise exposure. This investigation detailed DPOAE characteristics and behavioral hearing thresholds up to 20 kHz to identify promising metrics for early detection of cochlear dysfunction. In a sample of normal-hearing individuals with and without self-reported noise exposure, the DPOAE and hearing threshold measures, as assessed by two questions, were examined. The effects on various auditory measures in individuals aged 10-65 years old with clinically normal/near-normal hearing through 4 kHz were evaluated. Individuals reporting occupational noise exposures (n = 84) and recreational noise exposures (n = 46) were compared to age-matched nonexposed individuals. The hearing thresholds and DPOAE level, fine structure, and component characteristics for the full frequency bandwidth were examined. The data suggest that the DPOAE levels measured using a range of stimulus levels hold clinical utility while fine structure characteristics offer limited use. Under carefully calibrated conditions, the extension to frequencies beyond 8 kHz in combination with various stimulus levels holds clinical utility. Moreover, this work supports the potential utility of the distortion product place component level for revealing differences in cochlear function due to self-reported, casual noise exposure that are not observable in behavioral hearing thresholds.

Evaluation of hearing loss in young adults after exposure to 3.0T MRI with standard hearing protection.

Standard clinical protocols require hearing protection during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for patient safety. This investigation prospectively evaluated the auditory function impact of acoustic noise exposure during a 3.0T MRI in healthy adults. Twenty-nine participants with normal hearing underwent a comprehensive audiologic assessment before and immediately following a clinically indicated head MRI. Appropriate hearing protection with earplugs (and pads) was used per standard of practice. To characterize noise hazards, current sound monitoring tools were used to measure levels of pulse sequences measured. A third audiologic test was performed if a significant threshold shift (STS) was identified at the second test, within 30 days post MRI. Some sequences produced high levels (up to 114.5 dBA; 129 dB peak SPL) that required hearing protection but did not exceed 100% daily noise dose. One participant exhibited an STS in the frequency region most highly associated with noise-induced hearing loss. No participants experienced OSHA-defined STS in either ear. Overall, OAE measures did not show evidence of changes in cochlear function after MRI. In conclusion, hearing threshold shifts associated with hearing loss or OAE level shifts reflecting underlying cochlear damage were not detected in any of the 3.0T MRI study participants who used the current recommended hearing protection.

Growth hormone deficiency in a child with branchio-oto-renal spectrum disorder: Clinical evidence of EYA1 in pituitary development and a recommendation for pituitary function surveillance.

Branchio-oto-renal spectrum disorder (BORSD) is a rare autosomal dominant condition characterized by ear abnormalities with hard of hearing/deafness, second branchial arch malformations and renal anomalies. Pathogenic variations in EYA1 gene are found in the majority of clinically diagnosed individuals with BORSD. We describe an infant with BORSD related to a paternally inherited heterozygous pathogenic variation in EYA1 gene presenting with poor growth and hypoglycemia due to growth hormone deficiency. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed a diminutive pituitary gland and morphologically abnormal sella. Upon initiation of growth hormone therapy, the hypoglycemia resolved and catch up growth ensued. Pituitary abnormalities have not been reported previously in patients with BORSD. The zebrafish ortholog of eya1 is important for the development of adenohypophysis, suggesting that this patient's growth hormone deficiency and pituitary abnormality are part of BORSD. Inclusion of screening for pituitary hormone deficiency and pituitary imaging should be considered as a part of surveillance in patients with BORSD.

Applying U.S. national guidelines for ototoxicity monitoring in adult patients: perspectives on patient populations, service gaps, barriers and solutions.

OBJECTIVES: To promote establishment of effective ototoxicity monitoring programs (OMPs), this report reviews the U.S. national audiology guidelines in relation to "real world" OMP application. Background is provided on the mechanisms, risks and clinical presentation of hearing loss associated with major classes of ototoxic medications. DESIGN: This is a non-systematic review using PubMed, national and international agency websites, personal communications between ototoxicity experts, and results of unpublished research. Examples are provided of OMPs in various healthcare settings within the U.S. civilian sector, Department of Defense (DoD), and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). STUDY SAMPLE: The five OMPs compared in this report represent a convenience sample of the programs with which the authors are affiliated. Their opinions were elicited via two semi-structured teleconferences on barriers and facilitators of OMP, followed by a self-administered questionnaire on OMP characteristics and practices, with responses synthesized herein. Preliminary results are provided from an ongoing VA clinical trial at one of these OMP sites. Participants were 40 VA patients who received cisplatin chemotherapy in 2014-2017. The study arms contrast access to care for OMP delivered on the treatment unit versus usual care as provided in the audiology clinic. RESULTS: Protocols of the OMPs examined varied, reflecting their diverse settings. Service delivery concerns included baseline tests missed or completed after the initial treatment, and monitoring tests done infrequently or only after cessation of treatment. Perceived barriers involved logistics related to accessing and testing patients, such as a lack of processes to help patients enter programs, patients' time and scheduling constraints, and inconvenient audiology clinic locations. Use of abbreviated or screening methods facilitated monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: The most effective OMPs integrated audiological management into care pathways of the clinical specialties that prescribe ototoxic medications. More OMP guidance is needed to inform evaluation schedules, outcome reporting, and determination of actionable ototoxic changes. Guidance is also lacking on the use of hearing conservation approaches suitable for the mass testing needed to support large-scale OMP efforts. Guideline adherence might improve with formal endorsement from organizations governing the medical specialty stakeholders in OMP such as oncologists, pulmonologists, infectious disease specialists, ototolaryngologists and pharmacists.

Comparing the Accuracy and Speed of Manual and Tracking Methods of Measuring Hearing Thresholds.

OBJECTIVES: The reliability of hearing thresholds obtained using the standard clinical method (modified Hughson-Westlake) has been the focus of previous investigation given the potential for tester bias (). In recent years, more precise methods in laboratory studies have been used that control for sources of bias, often at the expense of longer test times. The aim of this pilot study was to compare test-retest variability and time requirement to obtain a full set of hearing thresholds (0.125 - 20 kHz) of the clinical modified Hughson-Westlake (manual) method with that of the automated, modified (single frequency) Békésy tracking method (). DESIGN: Hearing thresholds from 10 subjects (8 female) between 19 to 47 years old (mean = 28.3; SD = 9.4) were measured using two methods with identical test hardware and calibration. Thresholds were obtained using the modified Hughson-Westlake (manual) method and the Békésy method (tracking). Measurements using each method were repeated after one-week. Test-retest variability within each measurement method was computed across test sessions. Results from each test method as well as test time across methods were compared. RESULTS: Test-retest variability was comparable and statistically indistinguishable between the two test methods. Thresholds were approximately 5 dB lower when measured using the tracking method. This difference was not statistically significant. The manual method of measuring thresholds was faster by approximately 4 minutes. Both methods required less time (~ 2 mins) in the second session as compared to the first. CONCLUSION: Hearing thresholds obtained using the manual method can be just as reliable as those obtained using the tracking method over the large frequency range explored here (0.125 - 20 kHz). These results perhaps point to the importance of equivalent and valid calibration techniques that can overcome frequency dependent discrepancies, most prominent at higher frequencies, in the sound pressure delivered to the ear.

Characteristics of the 2f(1)-f(2) distortion product otoacoustic emission in a normal hearing population.

Distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) fine structure and component characteristics are reported between 0.75 and 16 kHz in 356 clinically normal hearing human subjects ages 10 to 65 yr. Stimulus tones at 55/40, 65/55, and 75/75 dB SPL were delivered using custom designed drivers and a calibration method that compensated for the depth of insertion of the otoacoustic emission (OAE) probe in the ear canal. DPOAE fine structure depth and spacing were found to be consistent with previous reports with depth varying between 3 and 7 dB and average spacing ratios (f/Δf) between 15 and 25 depending on stimulus level and frequency. In general, fine structure depth increased with increasing frequency, likely due to a diminishing difference between DPOAE component levels. Fine structure spacing became wider with increasing age above 8 kHz. DPOAE components were extracted using the inverse fast Fourier transform method, adhering to a strict signal to noise ratio criterion for clearer interpretation. Component data from four age groups between 18 and 55 yr old were available for the stimulus levels of 75/75 dB SPL. The age groups could be differentiated with greater than 90% accuracy when using the level of the component presumed to originate from the DPOAE characteristic frequency place. This accuracy held even for frequencies at and below 4 kHz where the age groups exhibited similar average hearing thresholds.

Tensor Tympani and Stapedial Tendon Reconstruction for Postoperative Hyperacusis after Tendon Lysis for Middle Ear Myoclonus.

OBJECTIVE: To present a method for repair of the stapedial and tensor tympani tendons in a patient with hyperacusis after a tendon lysis procedure. PATIENTS: A 71-year-old professional musician who presented to clinic with debilitating hyperacusis following a tensor tympani and stapedial tendon lysis procedure to treat middle ear myoclonus. INTERVENTIONS: A novel procedure for reapproximation of the tensor tympani and stapedial tendons into their native insertion points using periosteal grafts and nitinol wire. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Stapedial reflex measurements, uncomfortable loudness level, and subjective patient experience. RESULTS: Postoperatively, the patient had objective improvement in hyperacusis with return of acoustic reflexes in the affected ear and durable improvements in their frequency-specific uncomfortable loudness levels. CONCLUSIONS: This case describes the debilitating complication of hyperacusis following tendon lysis and highlights the importance of maximizing behavioral and medical measures prior to undergoing surgical intervention for middle ear myoclonus.

Clinical Considerations for Routine Auditory and Vestibular Monitoring in Patients With Cystic Fibrosis.

Purpose Specific classes of antibiotics, such as aminoglycosides, have well-established adverse events producing permanent hearing loss, tinnitus, and balance and/or vestibular problems (i.e., ototoxicity). Although these antibiotics are frequently used to treat pseudomonas and other bacterial infections in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF), there are no formalized recommendations describing approaches to implementation of guideline adherent ototoxicity monitoring as part of CF clinical care. Method This consensus statement was developed by the International Ototoxicity Management Working Group (IOMG) Ad Hoc Committee on Aminoglycoside Antibiotics to address the clinical need for ototoxicity management in CF patients treated with known ototoxic medications. These clinical protocol considerations were created using consensus opinion from a community of international experts and available evidence specific to patients with CF, as well as published national and international guidelines on ototoxicity monitoring. Results The IOMG advocates four clinical recommendations for implementing routine and guideline adherent ototoxicity management in patients with CF. These are (a) including questions about hearing, tinnitus, and balance/vestibular problems as part of the routine CF case history for all patients; (b) utilizing timely point-of-care measures; (c) establishing a baseline and conducting posttreatment evaluations for each course of intravenous ototoxic drug treatment; and (d) repeating annual hearing and vestibular evaluations for all patients with a history of ototoxic antibiotic exposure. Conclusion Increased efforts for implementation of an ototoxicity management program in the CF care team model will improve identification of ototoxicity signs and symptoms, allow for timely therapeutic follow-up, and provide the clinician and patient an opportunity to make an informed decision about potential treatment modifications to minimize adverse events. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.16624366.

The GoAudio Quantitative Mobile Audiology Test Enhances Access to Clinical Hearing Assessments.

Purpose Hearing loss is a common impairment of the human senses with an estimated 48 million American adults reporting some trouble hearing; however, access to hearing health care is limited. Detection of hearing loss through a mobile, handheld tool can provide an important access point and potentially expedited access to the continuum of hearing health care. Here, we determined that GoAudio, a portable, automated hearing assessment tool, can be used to identify individuals who require additional hearing evaluation in a clinical workflow. Method This initial study included 24 adults, ages 18-65 years (M = 50, SD = 12), tested with GoAudio versus "gold-standard" clinical audiometry for eight frequencies to evaluate "real-world" applications. Participants utilized noise-canceling headphones combined with a tablet-based application for the GoAudio assessment. Results The primary study outcome measurements were the comparison of hearing thresholds (dB HL) from clinical audiometry and GoAudio. Results suggest that GoAudio is comparable to clinical audiometry for the identification of hearing loss at most frequencies (except 1 kHz for both ears and 2 kHz in the right ear). Upon stratifying data based on age, we identified that GoAudio is capable of identifying suspected age-related hearing loss or hearing thresholds greater than 30 dB HL at higher frequencies in both ears. Conclusion The study results support that GoAudio can be used effectively in clinical practice workflows as a reliable hearing assessment tool for the identification of hearing loss at the majority of frequencies outside a sound-treated booth and can detect characteristics of age-related hearing loss. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13087682.

Introduction to the Audiological Evaluation: Case-Based Applications to Patients with Skull Base Disease.

Objectives To provide an introduction to the role of audiological evaluations with special reference to patients with skull base disease. Design Review article with case-based overview of the current state of the practice of diagnostic audiology through highlighting the multifaceted clinical toolbox and the value of mechanism-based audiological evaluations that contribute to otologic differential diagnosis. Setting Current state of the practice of diagnostic audiology. Main Outcome Measures Understanding of audiological evaluation results in clinical practice and value of contributions to interdisciplinary teams to identify and quantify dysfunction along the auditory pathway and its subsequent effects. Results Accurate auditory information is best captured with a test battery that consists of various assessment crosschecks and mechanism-driven assessments. Conclusion Audiologists utilize a comprehensive clinical toolbox to gather information for assessment, diagnosis, and management of numerous pathologies. This information, in conjunction with thorough medical review, provides mechanism-specific contributions to the otologic and lateral skull base differential diagnosis.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Sudden Hearing Loss (Update) Executive Summary.

OBJECTIVE: Sudden hearing loss is a frightening symptom that often prompts an urgent or emergent visit to a health care provider. It is frequently, but not universally, accompanied by tinnitus and/or vertigo. Sudden sensorineural hearing loss affects 5 to 27 per 100,000 people annually, with about 66,000 new cases per year in the United States. This guideline update provides evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, management, and follow-up of patients who present with sudden hearing loss. It focuses on sudden sensorineural hearing loss in adult patients aged 18 and over and primarily on those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Prompt recognition and management of sudden sensorineural hearing loss may improve hearing recovery and patient quality of life. The guideline update is intended for all clinicians who diagnose or manage adult patients who present with sudden hearing loss. PURPOSE: The purpose of this guideline update is to provide clinicians with evidence-based recommendations in evaluating patients with sudden hearing loss and sudden sensorineural hearing loss, with particular emphasis on managing idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The guideline update group recognized that patients enter the health care system with sudden hearing loss as a nonspecific primary complaint. Therefore, the initial recommendations of this guideline update address distinguishing sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss at the time of presentation with hearing loss. They also clarify the need to identify rare, nonidiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to help separate those patients from those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss, who are the target population for the therapeutic interventions that make up the bulk of the guideline update. By focusing on opportunities for quality improvement, this guideline should improve diagnostic accuracy, facilitate prompt intervention, decrease variations in management, reduce unnecessary tests and imaging procedures, and improve hearing and rehabilitative outcomes for affected patients. METHODS: Consistent with the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation's Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual, Third Edition, the guideline update group was convened with representation from the disciplines of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, otology, neurotology, family medicine, audiology, emergency medicine, neurology, radiology, advanced practice nursing, and consumer advocacy. A systematic review of the literature was performed, and the prior clinical practice guideline on sudden hearing loss was reviewed in detail. Key action statements (KASs) were updated with new literature, and evidence profiles were brought up to the current standard. Research needs identified in the original clinical practice guideline and data addressing them were reviewed. Current research needs were identified and delineated. RESULTS: The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following: clinicians should distinguish sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss when a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss (KAS 1); clinicians should educate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss about the natural history of the condition, the benefits and risks of medical interventions, and the limitations of existing evidence regarding efficacy (KAS 7); and clinicians should counsel patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus about the possible benefits of audiological rehabilitation and other supportive measures (KAS 13). These strong recommendations were modified from the initial clinical practice guideline for clarity and timing of intervention. The guideline update group made strong recommendation against the following: clinicians should not order routine computed tomography of the head in the initial evaluation of a patient with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss (KAS 3); clinicians should not obtain routine laboratory tests in patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss (KAS 5); and clinicians should not routinely prescribe antivirals, thrombolytics, vasodilators, or vasoactive substances to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss (KAS 11). The guideline update group made recommendations for the following: clinicians should assess patients with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss through history and physical examination for bilateral sudden hearing loss, recurrent episodes of sudden hearing loss, and/or focal neurologic findings (KAS 2); in patients with sudden hearing loss, clinicians should obtain, or refer to a clinician who can obtain, audiometry as soon as possible (within 14 days of symptom onset) to confirm the diagnosis of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (KAS 4); clinicians should evaluate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss for retrocochlear pathology by obtaining a magnetic resonance imaging or auditory brainstem response (KAS 6); clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, intratympanic steroid therapy when patients have incomplete recovery from sudden sensorineural hearing loss 2 to 6 weeks after onset of symptoms (KAS 10); and clinicians should obtain follow-up audiometric evaluation for patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss at the conclusion of treatment and within 6 months of completion of treatment (KAS 12). These recommendations were clarified in terms of timing of intervention and audiometry, as well as method of retrocochlear workup. The guideline update group offered the following KASs as options: clinicians may offer corticosteroids as initial therapy to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss within 2 weeks of symptom onset (KAS 8); clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy within 2 weeks of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (KAS 9a); and clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy as salvage therapy within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (KAS 9b). DIFFERENCES FROM PRIOR GUIDELINE: Incorporation of new evidence profiles to include quality improvement opportunities, confidence in the evidence, and differences of opinion Included 10 clinical practice guidelines, 29 new systematic reviews, and 36 new randomized controlled trials Highlights the urgency of evaluation and initiation of treatment, if treatment is offered, by emphasizing the time from symptom occurrence Clarification of terminology by changing potentially unclear statements; use of the term sudden sensorineural hearing loss to mean idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to emphasize that over 90% of sudden sensorineural hearing loss is idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss and to avoid confusion in nomenclature for the reader Changes to the key action statements (KASs) from the original guideline: KAS 1: When a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss, conductive hearing loss should be distinguished from sensorineural. KAS 2: The utility of history and physical examination when assessing for modifying factors is emphasized. KAS 3: The word routine is added to clarify that this statement addresses a nontargeted head computed tomography scan that is often ordered in the emergency room setting for patients presenting with sudden hearing loss. It does not refer to targeted scans such as a temporal bone computed tomography scan to assess for temporal bone pathology. KAS 4: The importance of audiometric confirmation of hearing status as soon as possible and within 14 days of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 5: New studies were added to confirm the lack of benefit of nontargeted laboratory testing in sudden sensorineural hearing loss. KAS 6: Audiometric follow-up is excluded as a reasonable workup for retrocochlear pathology. Magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography scan if magnetic resonance imaging cannot be done, or, secondarily, auditory brainstem response evaluation are the modalities recommended. A time frame for such testing is not specified, nor is it specified which clinician should be ordering this workup; however, it is implied that it would be the general or subspecialty otolaryngologist. KAS 7: The importance of shared decision making is highlighted, and salient points are emphasized. KAS 8: The option for corticosteroid intervention within 2 weeks of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 9: Changed to KAS 9a and 9b; hyperbaric oxygen therapy remains an option but only when combined with steroid therapy for either initial treatment (9a) or for salvage therapy (9b). The timing is within 2 weeks of onset for initial therapy and within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss for salvage therapy. KAS 10: Intratympanic steroid therapy for salvage is recommended within 2 to 6 weeks following onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The time to treatment is defined and emphasized. KAS 11: Antioxidants were removed from the list of interventions that the clinical practice guideline recommends against using. KAS 12: Follow-up audiometry at conclusion of treatment and also within 6 months posttreatment is added. KAS 13: This statement on audiologic rehabilitation includes patients who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus who may benefit from treatment. Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs Enhanced emphasis on patient education and shared decision making with tools provided to assist in the same.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Sudden Hearing Loss (Update).

OBJECTIVE: Sudden hearing loss is a frightening symptom that often prompts an urgent or emergent visit to a health care provider. It is frequently but not universally accompanied by tinnitus and/or vertigo. Sudden sensorineural hearing loss affects 5 to 27 per 100,000 people annually, with about 66,000 new cases per year in the United States. This guideline update provides evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, management, and follow-up of patients who present with sudden hearing loss. It focuses on sudden sensorineural hearing loss in adult patients aged ≥18 years and primarily on those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Prompt recognition and management of sudden sensorineural hearing loss may improve hearing recovery and patient quality of life. The guideline update is intended for all clinicians who diagnose or manage adult patients who present with sudden hearing loss. PURPOSE: The purpose of this guideline update is to provide clinicians with evidence-based recommendations in evaluating patients with sudden hearing loss and sudden sensorineural hearing loss, with particular emphasis on managing idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The guideline update group recognized that patients enter the health care system with sudden hearing loss as a nonspecific primary complaint. Therefore, the initial recommendations of this guideline update address distinguishing sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss at the time of presentation with hearing loss. They also clarify the need to identify rare, nonidiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to help separate those patients from those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss, who are the target population for the therapeutic interventions that make up the bulk of the guideline update. By focusing on opportunities for quality improvement, this guideline should improve diagnostic accuracy, facilitate prompt intervention, decrease variations in management, reduce unnecessary tests and imaging procedures, and improve hearing and rehabilitative outcomes for affected patients. METHODS: Consistent with the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation's "Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual, Third Edition" (Rosenfeld et al. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;148[1]:S1-S55), the guideline update group was convened with representation from the disciplines of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, otology, neurotology, family medicine, audiology, emergency medicine, neurology, radiology, advanced practice nursing, and consumer advocacy. A systematic review of the literature was performed, and the prior clinical practice guideline on sudden hearing loss was reviewed in detail. Key Action Statements (KASs) were updated with new literature, and evidence profiles were brought up to the current standard. Research needs identified in the original clinical practice guideline and data addressing them were reviewed. Current research needs were identified and delineated. RESULTS: The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following: (KAS 1) Clinicians should distinguish sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss when a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss. (KAS 7) Clinicians should educate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss about the natural history of the condition, the benefits and risks of medical interventions, and the limitations of existing evidence regarding efficacy. (KAS 13) Clinicians should counsel patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus about the possible benefits of audiologic rehabilitation and other supportive measures. These strong recommendations were modified from the initial clinical practice guideline for clarity and timing of intervention. The guideline update group made strong recommendations against the following: (KAS 3) Clinicians should not order routine computed tomography of the head in the initial evaluation of a patient with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 5) Clinicians should not obtain routine laboratory tests in patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 11) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe antivirals, thrombolytics, vasodilators, or vasoactive substances to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The guideline update group made recommendations for the following: (KAS 2) Clinicians should assess patients with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss through history and physical examination for bilateral sudden hearing loss, recurrent episodes of sudden hearing loss, and/or focal neurologic findings. (KAS 4) In patients with sudden hearing loss, clinicians should obtain, or refer to a clinician who can obtain, audiometry as soon as possible (within 14 days of symptom onset) to confirm the diagnosis of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 6) Clinicians should evaluate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss for retrocochlear pathology by obtaining magnetic resonance imaging or auditory brainstem response. (KAS 10) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, intratympanic steroid therapy when patients have incomplete recovery from sudden sensorineural hearing loss 2 to 6 weeks after onset of symptoms. (KAS 12) Clinicians should obtain follow-up audiometric evaluation for patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss at the conclusion of treatment and within 6 months of completion of treatment. These recommendations were clarified in terms of timing of intervention and audiometry and method of retrocochlear workup. The guideline update group offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 8) Clinicians may offer corticosteroids as initial therapy to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss within 2 weeks of symptom onset. (KAS 9a) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy within 2 weeks of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 9b) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy as salvage therapy within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. DIFFERENCES FROM PRIOR GUIDELINE: Incorporation of new evidence profiles to include quality improvement opportunities, confidence in the evidence, and differences of opinion Included 10 clinical practice guidelines, 29 new systematic reviews, and 36 new randomized controlled trials Highlights the urgency of evaluation and initiation of treatment, if treatment is offered, by emphasizing the time from symptom occurrence Clarification of terminology by changing potentially unclear statements; use of the term sudden sensorineural hearing loss to mean idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to emphasize that >90% of sudden sensorineural hearing loss is idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss and to avoid confusion in nomenclature for the reader Changes to the KASs from the original guideline: KAS 1-When a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss, conductive hearing loss should be distinguished from sensorineural. KAS 2-The utility of history and physical examination when assessing for modifying factors is emphasized. KAS 3-The word "routine" is added to clarify that this statement addresses nontargeted head computerized tomography scan that is often ordered in the emergency room setting for patients presenting with sudden hearing loss. It does not refer to targeted scans, such as temporal bone computerized tomography scan, to assess for temporal bone pathology. KAS 4-The importance of audiometric confirmation of hearing status as soon as possible and within 14 days of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 5-New studies were added to confirm the lack of benefit of nontargeted laboratory testing in sudden sensorineural hearing loss. KAS 6-Audiometric follow-up is excluded as a reasonable workup for retrocochlear pathology. Magnetic resonance imaging, computerized tomography scan if magnetic resonance imaging cannot be done, and, secondarily, auditory brainstem response evaluation are the modalities recommended. A time frame for such testing is not specified, nor is it specified which clinician should be ordering this workup; however, it is implied that it would be the general or subspecialty otolaryngologist. KAS 7-The importance of shared decision making is highlighted, and salient points are emphasized. KAS 8-The option for corticosteroid intervention within 2 weeks of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 9-Changed to KAS 9A and 9B. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy remains an option but only when combined with steroid therapy for either initial treatment (9A) or salvage therapy (9B). The timing of initial therapy is within 2 weeks of onset, and that of salvage therapy is within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. KAS 10-Intratympanic steroid therapy for salvage is recommended within 2 to 6 weeks following onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The time to treatment is defined and emphasized. KAS 11-Antioxidants were removed from the list of interventions that the clinical practice guideline recommends against using. KAS 12-Follow-up audiometry at conclusion of treatment and also within 6 months posttreatment is added. KAS 13-This statement on audiologic rehabilitation includes patients who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus who may benefit from treatment. Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs Enhanced emphasis on patient education and shared decision making with tools provided to assist in same.

Serial Monitoring of Otoacoustic Emissions in Clinical Trials.

The purpose of this report is to provide guidance on the use of otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) as a clinical trial outcome measure for pharmaceutical interventions developed to prevent acquired hearing loss secondary to cochlear insult. OAEs are a rapid, noninvasive measure that can be used to monitor cochlear outer hair cell function. Serial monitoring of OAEs is most clearly established for use in hearing conservation and ototoxicity monitoring programs in which they exhibit more frequent and earlier changes compared with pure-tone audiometry. They also show promise in recent human trials of otoprotectants. Questions remain, however, concerning the most appropriate OAE protocols to use and what constitutes a "significant" OAE response change. Measurement system capabilities are expanding and test efficacy will vary across locations and patient populations. Yet, standardizing minimal measurement criteria and reporting of results is needed including documentation of test-retest variability so that useful comparisons can be made across trials. It is also clear that protocols must be theoretically sound based on known patterns of damage, generate valid results in most individuals tested, be accurate, repeatable, and involve minimal time. Based on the potential value added, OAEs should be included in clinical trials when measurement conditions and time permit.

Individual differences in behavioral estimates of cochlear nonlinearities.

Psychophysical methods provide a mechanism to infer the characteristics of basilar membrane responses in humans that cannot be directly measured. Because these behavioral measures are indirect, the interpretation of results depends on several underlying assumptions. Ongoing uncertainty about the suitability of these assumptions and the most appropriate measurement and compression estimation procedures, and unanswered questions regarding the effects of cochlear hearing loss and age on basilar membrane nonlinearities, motivated this experiment. Here, estimates of cochlear nonlinearities using temporal masking curves (TMCs) were obtained in a large sample of adults of various ages whose hearing ranged from normal to moderate cochlear hearing loss (Experiment 1). A wide range of compression slopes was observed, even for subjects with similar ages and thresholds, which warranted further investigation (Experiment 2). Potential sources of variance contributing to these individual differences were explored, including procedural-related factors (test-retest reliability, suitability of the linear-reference TMC, probe sensation levels, and parameters of TMC fitting algorithms) and subject-related factors (age and age-related changes in temporal processing, strength of cochlear nonlinearities estimated with distortion-product otoacoustic emissions, estimates of changes in cochlear function from damage to outer hair cells versus inner hair cells). Subject age did not contribute significantly to TMC or compression slopes, and TMC slopes did not vary significantly with threshold. Test-retest reliability of TMCs suggested that TMC masker levels and the general shapes of TMCs did not change in a systematic way when re-measured many weeks later. Although the strength of compression decreased slightly with increasing hearing loss, the magnitude of individual differences in compression estimates makes it difficult to determine the effects of hearing loss and cochlear damage on basilar membrane nonlinearities in humans.

Evaluation of a telephone speech-enhancement algorithm among older adults with hearing loss.

PURPOSE: In this study, the authors evaluated a processing algorithm aimed at improving speech recognition via the telephone among older adults with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). METHOD: Thirty older adults with SNHL participated. Speech recognition was measured in quiet using the Modified Rhyme Test (MRT; Kreul et al., 1968) and the Speech Perception in Noise (SPIN; Bilger et al., 1984) sentences, and in noise using the Quick Speech in Noise (QSIN; Killion et al., 2004) test. Each test was presented via the telephone with and without processing. RESULTS: Significant improvements in recognition performance due to processing were observed for the SPIN and QSIN. The improvement on the QSIN was significantly greater than on the MRT and SPIN, likely because the MRT and SPIN sentences were presented in quiet, whereas the QSIN was presented in noise. Significant improvements in recognition performance were observed for both an offline version and a real-time version of the algorithm relative to the unprocessed condition, although no difference was noted between the 2 versions. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that preprocessing the acoustic signal is a viable method of improving speech recognition via the telephone. The algorithm has the potential to benefit older adults with SNHL who struggle to communicate via the telephone with or without hearing aids.