Ginkgo biloba for tinnitus.

BACKGROUND: Tinnitus is a symptom defined as the perception of sound in the absence of an external source. In England alone there are an estimated ¾ million general practice consultations every year where the primary complaint is tinnitus, equating to a major burden on healthcare services. Clinical management strategies include education and advice, relaxation therapy, tinnitus retraining therapy (TRT), cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), sound enrichment using ear-level sound generators or hearing aids, and drug therapies to manage co-morbid symptoms such as insomnia, anxiety or depression.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of Ginkgo biloba for tinnitus in adults and children. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; CENTRAL (2022, Issue 6); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 7 June 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults and children with acute or chronic subjective tinnitus. We included studies where the intervention involved Ginkgo biloba and this was compared to placebo, no intervention, or education and information. Concurrent use of other medication or other treatment was acceptable if used equally in each group. Where an additional intervention was used equally in both groups, we analysed this as a separate comparison. The review included all courses of Ginkgo biloba, regardless of dose regimens or formulations, and for any duration of treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were tinnitus symptom severity measured as a global score on a multi-item tinnitus questionnaire and serious adverse effects (bleeding, seizures). Our secondary outcomes were tinnitus loudness (change in subjective perception), tinnitus intrusiveness, generalised depression, generalised anxiety, health-related quality of life and other adverse effects (gastrointestinal upset, headache, allergic reaction). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: This review included 12 studies (with a total of  1915 participants). Eleven studies compared the effects of Ginkgo biloba with placebo and one study compared the effects of Ginkgo biloba with hearing aids to hearing aids alone. All included studies were parallel-group RCTs. In general, risk of bias was high or unclear due to selection bias and poor reporting of allocation concealment and blinding of participants, personnel and outcome assessments. Due to heterogeneity in the outcomes measured and measurement methods used, only limited data pooling was possible.  Ginkgo biloba versus placebo When we pooled data from two studies for the primary outcome tinnitus symptom severity, we found that Ginkgo biloba may have little to no effect (Tinnitus Handicap Inventory scores) at three to six months compared to placebo, but the evidence is very uncertain (mean difference (MD) -1.35 (scale 0 to 100), 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.26 to 5.55; 2 studies; 85 participants) (very low-certainty). Ginkgo biloba may result in little to no difference in the risk of bleeding or seizures, with no serious adverse effects reported in either group (4 studies; 1154 participants; low-certainty). For the secondary outcomes, one study found that there may be little to no difference between the effects of Ginkgo biloba and placebo on tinnitus loudness measured with audiometric loudness matching at 12 weeks, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -4.00 (scale -10 to 140 dB), 95% CI -13.33 to 5.33; 1 study; 73 participants) (very low-certainty). One study found that there may be little to no difference between the effects of Ginkgo biloba and placebo on health-related quality of life measured with the Glasgow Health Status Inventory at three months (MD -0.58 (scale 0 to 100), 95% CI -4.67 to 3.51; 1 study; 60 participants) (low-certainty). Ginkgo biloba may not increase the frequency of other adverse effects (gastrointestinal upset, headache, allergic reaction) at three months compared to placebo (risk ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.60; 4 studies; 1175 participants) (low-certainty). None of the studies reported the other secondary outcomes of tinnitus intrusiveness or changes in depressive symptoms or depression, anxiety symptoms or generalised anxiety. Gingko biloba with concurrent intervention versus concurrent intervention only One study compared Ginkgo biloba with hearing aids to hearing aids only. It assessed the mean difference in the change in Tinnitus Handicap Inventory scores and tinnitus loudness using a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS) at three months. The study did not report adverse effects, tinnitus intrusiveness, changes in depressive symptoms or depression, anxiety symptoms or generalised anxiety, or health-related quality of life. This was a single, very small study (22 participants) and for all outcomes the certainty of the evidence was very low. We were unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is uncertainty about the benefits and harms of Ginkgo biloba for the treatment of tinnitus when compared to placebo. We were unable to draw meaningful conclusions regarding the benefits and harms of Ginkgo biloba when used with concurrent intervention (hearing aids). The certainty of the evidence for the reported outcomes, assessed using GRADE, ranged from low to very low. Future research into the effectiveness of Ginkgo biloba in patients with tinnitus should use rigorous methodology. Randomisation and blinding should be of the highest quality, given the subjective nature of tinnitus and the strong likelihood of a placebo response. The CONSORT statement should be used in the design and reporting of future studies. We also recommend the use of validated, patient-centred outcome measures for research in the field of tinnitus.

A Delphi survey to determine a definition and description of hyperacusis by clinician consensus.

OBJECTIVE: There is currently no singularly accepted definition of hyperacusis. The aim of this study was to determine a definition and description of hyperacusis by clinician consensus. DESIGN: A three-round Delphi survey involving hearing healthcare professionals built towards clinical consensus on a definition of hyperacusis. Round 1 involved three open-ended questions about hyperacusis. Seventy-nine statements were generated on descriptions, impact, sounds, and potential features of hyperacusis. Agreement on the relevance of each statement to defining or describing hyperacusis was then measured in Rounds 2 and 3. General consensus was defined a priori as ≥70% agreement, or ≥90 for clinical decision making. STUDY SAMPLE: Forty-five hearing healthcare professionals were recruited to take part in this study. Forty-one completed Round 1, 36 completed Round 2, and 33 completed Round 3. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 42/79 statements. From these a consensus definition includes "A reduced tolerance to sound(s) that are perceived as normal to the majority of the population or were perceived as normal to the person before their onset of hyperacusis". A consensus description of hyperacusis was also determined. CONCLUSIONS: This consensus definition of hyperacusis will help to determine the scope of clinical practice guidelines and influence needed research on hyperacusis.

Readability assessment of self-report hyperacusis questionnaires.

Objective: To assess the overall readability of five currently available hyperacusis questionnaires and to assess the variability of single items within each questionnaire.Design: Comparative study of self-report hyperacusis questionnaires: (1) Geräuschüberempfindlichkeits-Fragebogen (GUF), (2) Noise Avoidance Questionnaire (NAQ), (3) Hyperacusis Questionnaire (HQ), (4) Sound Sensitive-Tinnitus Index (SSTI), and (5) Inventory of Hyperacusis Symptoms (IHS). Well-established readability formulas Flesh-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) and FORCAST and a computerised readability calculation software were used.Study sample: Five questionnaires.Results: Reading levels calculated by each formula varied for every questionnaire. Readability scores ranged from 7.7th to 12.7th grade for overall readability depending on the questionnaire. This exceeded the grade reading levels of 5th-6th grade (10-12 years old) as recommended by the American Medical Association or 7th-8th grade (12-14 years old) as recommended by the US National Institutes of Health. Single item readability analysis based on FKGL revealed that 32%-70% of single items are written above the recommended grade levels.Conclusion: All five questionnaires are written at close to or exceeding the recommended grade levels. This requires attention from developers but also when interpreting the questionnaire scores obtained in clinic.

Cochrane corner: Sound therapy (using amplification devices and/or sound generators) for tinnitus.

This Cochrane Corner features "Sound therapy (using amplification devices or sound generators) for tinnitus" published in 2018. Sereda et al. identified eight clinical trials including 590 participants receiving sound therapy for tinnitus. None of the included studies addressed three main comparisons of the review (comparing hearing aids, sound generators and combination devices with a waiting list control group, placebo or education/information only). One study compared patients fitted with sound generators versus those fitted with hearing aids and found no difference between them in their effects on tinnitus symptom severity. The use of both types of device was associated with a clinically significant reduction in tinnitus symptom severity. Three studies compared hearing aids with a sound generator to hearing aids alone and measured tinnitus symptom severity. The use of both types of device was again associated with a clinically significant reduction in tinnitus symptom severity. This Cochrane review shows that both hearing aids and sound generators may be beneficial for reducing tinnitus severity in some patients, but that there is insufficient evidence at this stage to recommend one device over another, or whether these devices offer any improvement over a placebo treatment.

A process for prioritising systematic reviews in tinnitus.

Objective: To develop an innovative prioritisation process to identify topics for new or updated systematic reviews of tinnitus research.Design: A two-stage prioritisation process was devised. First, a scoping review assessed the amount of randomized controlled trial-level evidence available. This enabled development of selection criteria for future reviews, aided the design of template protocol and suggested the scale of work that would be required to conduct these reviews. Second, using the pre-defined primary and secondary criteria, interventions were prioritised for systematic review.Study sample: Searches identified 1080 records. After removal of duplicates and out of scope works, 437 records remained for full data charting.Results: The process was tested, using subjective tinnitus as the clinical condition and using Cochrane as the systematic review platform. The criteria produced by this process identified three high priority reviews: (1) Sound therapy using amplification devices and/or sound generators; (2) Betahistine and (3) Cognitive behaviour therapy. Further secondary priorities were: (4) Gingko biloba, (5) Anxiolytics, (6) Hypnotics, (7) Antiepileptics and (8) Neuromodulation.Conclusions: A process was developed which successfully identified priority areas for Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions for subjective tinnitus. This technique could easily be transferred to other conditions and other types of systematic reviews.

Combined Amplification and Sound Generation for Tinnitus: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVES: In most cases, tinnitus is accompanied by some degree of hearing loss. Current tinnitus management guidelines recognize the importance of addressing hearing difficulties, with hearing aids being a common option. Sound therapy is the preferred mode of audiological tinnitus management in many countries, including in the United Kingdom. Combination instruments provide a further option for those with an aidable hearing loss, as they combine amplification with a sound generation option. The aims of this scoping review were to catalog the existing body of evidence on combined amplification and sound generation for tinnitus and consider opportunities for further research or evidence synthesis. DESIGN: A scoping review is a rigorous way to identify and review an established body of knowledge in the field for suggestive but not definitive findings and gaps in current knowledge. A wide variety of databases were used to ensure that all relevant records within the scope of this review were captured, including gray literature, conference proceedings, dissertations and theses, and peer-reviewed articles. Data were gathered using scoping review methodology and consisted of the following steps: (1) identifying potentially relevant records; (2) selecting relevant records; (3) extracting data; and (4) collating, summarizing, and reporting results. RESULTS: Searches using 20 different databases covered peer-reviewed and gray literature and returned 5959 records. After exclusion of duplicates and works that were out of scope, 89 records remained for further analysis. A large number of records identified varied considerably in methodology, applied management programs, and type of devices. There were significant differences in practice between different countries and clinics regarding candidature and fitting of combination aids, partly driven by the application of different management programs. CONCLUSIONS: Further studies on the use and effects of combined amplification and sound generation for tinnitus are indicated, including further efficacy studies, evidence synthesis, development of guidelines, and recommended procedures that are based on existing knowledge, expert knowledge, and clinical service evaluations.

Sound therapy (using amplification devices and/or sound generators) for tinnitus.

BACKGROUND: Tinnitus affects 10% to 15% of the adult population, with about 20% of these experiencing symptoms that negatively affect quality of life. In England alone there are an estimated ¾ million general practice consultations every year where the primary complaint is tinnitus, equating to a major burden on healthcare services. Clinical management strategies include education and advice, relaxation therapy, tinnitus retraining therapy (TRT), cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), sound enrichment using ear-level sound generators or hearing aids, and drug therapies to manage co-morbid symptoms such as insomnia, anxiety or depression. Hearing aids, sound generators and combination devices (amplification and sound generation within one device) are a component of many tinnitus management programmes and together with information and advice are a first line of management in audiology departments for someone who has tinnitus. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of sound therapy (using amplification devices and/or sound generators) for tinnitus in adults. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, via the Cochrane Register of Studies); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 23 July 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults with acute or chronic subjective idiopathic tinnitus. We included studies where the intervention involved hearing aids, sound generators or combination hearing aids and compared them to waiting list control, placebo or education/information only with no device. We also included studies comparing hearing aids to sound generators, combination hearing aids to hearing aids, and combination hearing aids to sound generators. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were tinnitus symptom severity as measured as a global score on multi-item tinnitus questionnaire and significant adverse effects as indicated by an increase in self-reported tinnitus loudness. Our secondary outcomes were depressive symptoms, symptoms of generalised anxiety, health-related quality of life and adverse effects associated with wearing the device such as pain, discomfort, tenderness or skin irritation, or ear infections. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics. MAIN RESULTS: This review included eight studies (with a total of 590 participants). Seven studies investigated the effects of hearing aids, four combination hearing aids and three sound generators. Seven studies were parallel-group RCTs and one had a cross-over design. In general, risk of bias was unclear due to lack of detail about sequence generation and allocation concealment. There was also little or no use of blinding.No data for our outcomes were available for any of our three main comparisons (comparing hearing aids, sound generators and combination devices with a waiting list control group, placebo or education/information only). Data for our additional comparisons (comparing these devices with each other) were also few, with limited potential for data pooling.Hearing aid only versus sound generator device onlyOne study compared patients fitted with sound generators versus those fitted with hearing aids and found no difference between them in their effects on our primary outcome, tinnitus symptom severity measured with the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) at 3, 6 or 12 months (low-quality evidence). The use of both types of device was associated with a clinically significant reduction in tinnitus symptom severity.Combination hearing aid versus hearing aid onlyThree studies compared combination hearing aids with hearing aids and measured tinnitus symptom severity using the THI or Tinnitus Functional Index. When we pooled the data we found no difference between them (standardised mean difference -0.15, 95% confidence interval -0.52 to 0.22; three studies; 114 participants) (low-quality evidence). The use of both types of device was again associated with a clinically significant reduction in tinnitus symptom severity.Adverse effects were not assessed in any of the included studies.None of the studies measured the secondary outcomes of depressive symptoms or depression, anxiety symptoms or generalised anxiety, or health-related quality of life as measured by a validated instrument, nor the newly developed core outcomes tinnitus intrusiveness, ability to ignore, concentration, quality of sleep and sense of control. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence to support the superiority of sound therapy for tinnitus over waiting list control, placebo or education/information with no device. There is insufficient evidence to support the superiority or inferiority of any of the sound therapy options (hearing aid, sound generator or combination hearing aid) over each other. The quality of evidence for the reported outcomes, assessed using GRADE, was low. Using a combination device, hearing aid or sound generator might result in little or no difference in tinnitus symptom severity.Future research into the effectiveness of sound therapy in patients with tinnitus should use rigorous methodology. Randomisation and blinding should be of the highest quality, given the subjective nature of tinnitus and the strong likelihood of a placebo response. The CONSORT statement should be used in the design and reporting of future studies. We also recommend the use of validated, patient-centred outcome measures for research in the field of tinnitus.

Pre-market version of a commercially available hearing instrument with a tinnitus sound generator: feasibility of evaluation in a clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: This report considers feasibility of conducting a UK trial of combination devices for tinnitus, using data from the study which evaluated different listener programmes available within the pre-market version of Oticon Alta with Tinnitus Sound Generator. DESIGN: Open and closed questions addressed the following feasibility issues: (1) Participant recruitment; (2) Device acceptability; (3) Programme preferences in different self-nominated listening situations; (4) Usability; (5) Compliance; (6) Adverse events. STUDY SAMPLE: Eight current combination hearing aid users (all males) aged between 62-72 years (mean age 67.25 years, SD = 3.8). RESULTS: All eight participants reported the physical aspects and noise options on the experimental device to be acceptable. Programmes with amplification and masking features were equally preferred over the basic amplification-only programme. Individual preferences for the different programme options varied widely, both across participants and across listening situations. CONCLUSIONS: A set of recommendations for future trials were formulated which calls for more "real world" trial design rather than tightly controlling the fitting procedure.

Electrical Stimulation of the Ear, Head, Cranial Nerve, or Cortex for the Treatment of Tinnitus: A Scoping Review.

Tinnitus is defined as the perception of sound in the absence of an external source. It is often associated with hearing loss and is thought to result from abnormal neural activity at some point or points in the auditory pathway, which is incorrectly interpreted by the brain as an actual sound. Neurostimulation therapies therefore, which interfere on some level with that abnormal activity, are a logical approach to treatment. For tinnitus, where the pathological neuronal activity might be associated with auditory and other areas of the brain, interventions using electromagnetic, electrical, or acoustic stimuli separately, or paired electrical and acoustic stimuli, have been proposed as treatments. Neurostimulation therapies should modulate neural activity to deliver a permanent reduction in tinnitus percept by driving the neuroplastic changes necessary to interrupt abnormal levels of oscillatory cortical activity and restore typical levels of activity. This change in activity should alter or interrupt the tinnitus percept (reduction or extinction) making it less bothersome. Here we review developments in therapies involving electrical stimulation of the ear, head, cranial nerve, or cortex in the treatment of tinnitus which demonstrably, or are hypothesised to, interrupt pathological neuronal activity in the cortex associated with tinnitus.

A systematic review of techniques and effects of self-help interventions for tinnitus: Application of taxonomies from health psychology.

OBJECTIVE: Self-help interventions are followed by people independently with minimal or no therapist contact. This review aims to assess the effectiveness of self-help interventions for adults with chronic tinnitus and systematically identify the self-help techniques used. DESIGN: Systematic review and application of health psychology taxonomies. Electronic database searches were conducted, supplemented by citation searching and hand-searching of key journals. Prospective controlled trials, which used measures of tinnitus distress, functional management, anxiety, depression, and quality of life, were included. Michie et al's behaviour change techniques (BCTs) taxonomy and Taylor et al's PRISMS taxonomy of self-management components were applied to describe interventions. STUDY SAMPLE: Five studies were included, providing low-to-moderate levels of evidence. RESULTS: Randomized controlled trial studies were too few and heterogeneous for meta-analysis to be performed. Studies comparing self-help interventions to therapist-guided interventions and assessing non tinnitus-specific psychosocial outcomes and functional management were lacking. Fifteen BCTs and eight self-management components were identified across interventions. CONCLUSIONS: A lack of high-quality and homogeneous studies meant that confident conclusions could not be drawn regarding the efficacy of self-help interventions for tinnitus. Better reporting and categorization of intervention techniques is needed for replication in research and practice and to facilitate understanding of intervention mechanisms.

Consensus on Hearing Aid Candidature and Fitting for Mild Hearing Loss, With and Without Tinnitus: Delphi Review.

OBJECTIVES: In many countries including the United Kingdom, hearing aids are a first line of audiologic intervention for many people with tinnitus and aidable hearing loss. Nevertheless, there is a lack of high quality evidence to support that they are of benefit for tinnitus, and wide variability in their use in clinical practice especially for people with mild hearing loss. The aim of this study was to identify a consensus among a sample of UK clinicians on the criteria for hearing aid candidature and clinical practice in fitting hearing aids specifically for mild hearing loss with and without tinnitus. This will allow professionals to establish clinical benchmarks and to gauge their practice with that used elsewhere. DESIGN: The Delphi technique, a systematic methodology that seeks consensus amongst experts through consultation using a series of iterative questionnaires, was used. A three-round Delphi survey explored clinical consensus among a panel of 29 UK hearing professionals. The authors measured panel agreement on 115 statements covering: (i) general factors affecting the decision to fit hearing aids, (ii) protocol-driven factors affecting the decision to fit hearing aids, (iii) general practice, and (iv) clinical observations. Consensus was defined as a priori ≥70% agreement across the panel. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 58 of the 115 statements. The broad areas of consensus were around factors important to consider when fitting hearing aids; hearing aid technology/features offered; and important clinical assessment to verify hearing aid fit (agreement of 70% or more). For patients with mild hearing loss, the greatest priority was given by clinicians to patient-centered criteria for fitting hearing aids: hearing difficulties, motivation to wear hearing aids, and impact of hearing loss on quality of life (chosen as top five by at least 64% of panelists). Objective measures were given a lower priority: degree of hearing loss and shape of the audiogram (chosen as top five by less than half of panelists). Areas where consensus was not reached were related to the use of questionnaires to predict and verify hearing aid benefit for both hearing and tinnitus; audiometric criteria for fitting hearing aids; and safety of using loud sounds when verifying hearing aid fitting when the patient has tinnitus (agreement of <70%). CONCLUSIONS: The authors identified practices that are considered important when recommending or fitting hearing aid for a patient with tinnitus. More importantly perhaps, they identified practical issues where there are divided opinions. Their findings inform the design of clinical trials and open up debate on the potential impact of practice differences on patient outcomes.

Relationship between tinnitus pitch and edge of hearing loss in individuals with a narrow tinnitus bandwidth.

OBJECTIVE: Psychoacoustic measures of tinnitus, in particular dominant tinnitus pitch and its relationship to the shape of the audiogram, are important in determining and verifying pathophysiological mechanisms of the condition. Our previous study postulated that this relationship might vary between different groups of people with tinnitus. For a small subset of participants with narrow tinnitus bandwidth, pitch was associated with the audiometric edge, consistent with the tonotopic reorganization theory. The current study objective was to establish this relationship in an independent sample. DESIGN: This was a retrospective design using data from five studies conducted between 2008 and 2013. STUDY SAMPLE: From a cohort of 380 participants, a subgroup group of 129 with narrow tinnitus bandwidth were selected. RESULTS: Tinnitus pitch generally fell within the area of hearing loss. There was a statistically significant correlation between dominant tinnitus pitch and edge frequency; higher edge frequency being associated with higher dominant tinnitus pitch. However, similar to our previous study, for the majority of participants pitch was more than an octave above the edge frequency. CONCLUSIONS: The findings did not support our prediction and are therefore not consistent with the reorganization theory postulating tinnitus pitch to correspond to the audiometric edge.

Amplification with hearing aids for patients with tinnitus and co-existing hearing loss.

BACKGROUND: Tinnitus is described as the perception of sound or noise in the absence of real acoustic stimulation. In the current absence of a cure for tinnitus, clinical management typically focuses on reducing the effects of co-morbid symptoms such as distress or hearing loss. Hearing loss is commonly co-morbid with tinnitus and so logic implies that amplification of external sounds by hearing aids will reduce perception of the tinnitus sound and the distress associated with it. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of hearing aids specifically in terms of tinnitus benefit in patients with tinnitus and co-existing hearing loss. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 19 August 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled trials recruiting adults with subjective tinnitus and some degree of hearing loss, where the intervention involves amplification with hearing aids and this is compared to interventions involving other medical devices, other forms of standard or complementary therapy, or combinations of therapies, no intervention or placebo interventions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors independently screened all selected abstracts. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed those potentially suitable studies for risk of bias. For studies meeting the inclusion criteria, we used the mean difference (MD) to compare hearing aids with other interventions and controls. MAIN RESULTS: One randomised controlled trial (91 participants) was included in this review. We judged the trial to have a low risk of bias for method of randomisation and outcome reporting, and an unclear risk of bias for other criteria. No non-randomised controlled trials meeting our inclusion criteria were identified. The included study measured change in tinnitus severity (primary measure of interest) using a tinnitus questionnaire measure, and change in tinnitus loudness (secondary measure of interest) on a visual analogue scale. Other secondary outcome measures of interest, namely change in the psychoacoustic characteristics of tinnitus, change in self reported anxiety, depression and quality of life, and change in neurophysiological measures, were not investigated in this study. The included study compared hearing aid use to sound generator use. The estimated effect on change in tinnitus loudness or severity as measured by the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory score was compatible with benefits for both hearing aids or sound generators but no difference was found between the two alternative treatments (MD -0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.92 to 6.12) (100-point scale); moderate quality evidence. No negative or adverse events were reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence base for hearing aid prescription for tinnitus is limited. To be useful, future studies should make appropriate use of blinding and be consistent in their use of outcome measures. Whilst hearing aids are sometimes prescribed as part of tinnitus management, there is currently no evidence to support or refute their use as a more routine intervention for tinnitus.

Evaluation of factors predicting tinnitus outcomes following cochlear implantation: Protocol for a prospective quasi-experimental study.

Cochlear implantation is an effective intervention to restore useful aspects of hearing function in adults with severe-to-profound hearing loss. Tinnitus, the perception of sound in the absence of an external source, is common in people with severe-to-profound hearing loss. Existing evidence suggests cochlear implantation may be effective in reducing the negative impact of tinnitus in this population. However, this is contradicted by data suggesting that up to half of cochlear implant recipients experience tinnitus, and that some of these patients who did not have tinnitus before cochlear implantation experience it after surgery or cochlear implant activation. Most evidence on the effects of cochlear implantation on tinnitus comes from secondary data in cochlear implant studies primarily concerned with hearing-related outcomes. Hence, the quality of the evidence for effects on tinnitus is low and not suitable to inform clinical recommendations or decision-making. This study will systematically collect data on tinnitus and tinnitus-related outcomes from patients at multiple points during the cochlear implant pathway to characterise changes in tinnitus. This will improve our understanding of the effects of cochlear implantation for tinnitus in adults with severe to profound hearing loss and inform the design of clinical trials of cochlear implantation for tinnitus.

Recent technological advances in sound-based approaches to tinnitus treatment: a review of efficacy considered against putative physiological mechanisms.

The past decade has seen an escalating enthusiasm to comprehend chronic tinnitus from the perspective of both scientific understanding and clinical management. At the same time, there is a significant interest and commercial investment in providing targeted and individualized approaches to care, which incorporate novel sound-based technologies, with standard audiological and psychological strategies. Commercially produced sound-based devices for the tinnitus market include Co-ordinated Reset Neuromodulation ® , Neuromonics © , Serenade ® , and Widex ® Zen. Additionally, experimental interventions such as those based on frequency-discrimination training are of current interest. Many of these interventions overtly claim to target the underlying neurological causes of tinnitus. Here, we briefly summarize current perspectives on the pathophysiology of tinnitus and evaluate claims made by the device supporters from a critical point of view. We provide an opinion on how future research in the field of individualized sound-based interventions might best provide a reliable evidence-base in this growing area of translational medicine.

Tinnitus, Suicide, and Suicidal Ideation: A Scoping Review of Primary Research.

Tinnitus (the perception of sound in the absence of any corresponding external source) is highly prevalent and can be distressing. There are unanswered questions about how tinnitus, suicidal thoughts, and suicidal behaviours co-occur and interact. To establish the extent of scientific literature, this scoping review catalogued primary reports addressing the associations between tinnitus, suicidal ideation, attempted suicide, and death by suicide. We searched OvidSP, Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Google Scholar, EThoS, and ProQuest for all studies and case reports on ideation and/or attempted and/or completed suicide in the context of tinnitus. Twenty-three studies were included, and data were charted according to study type. Several epidemiological and other observational studies gave evidence of risk factors and an association between suicidal ideation, suicidal behaviour, and tinnitus. However, there was no evidence of the direction of causality. Qualitative studies are indicated to explore the patient's experience and understand the dynamics of any interaction between tinnitus and suicidal thoughts and behaviours. A theory-informed model of tinnitus and suicide needs to be developed to inform the development of interventions and how tinnitus patients are supported clinically.

What Should Be Considered When Assessing Hyperacusis? A Qualitative Analysis of Problems Reported by Hyperacusis Patients.

Hyperacusis (decreased sound tolerance) is a prevalent complaint. Yet, to date, no research has qualitatively evaluated the types of problems experienced by adults with hyperacusis. Our service evaluation aims to determine the hyperacusis-related problem domains reported by patients and the degree to which these domains were reported together. Retrospective analysis was conducted on an anonymised clinical dataset from 306 patients who attended a UK tinnitus and hyperacusis treatment centre between 1994 and 2017. Conventional content analysis was used to categorise responses to the question 'Why is hyperacusis a problem?' into domains which were then subjected to a cluster analysis. Twenty-five problem domains were identified, of which 12 were further classified into three overarching categories. 'Fear', 'Reduced quality of life' and 'Physical reaction to sound' were most frequently reported problems. Cluster analysis revealed that 'Sleep difficulties' and 'Despondency', were commonly reported together. Adults with hyperacusis face many challenges in their everyday lives. The nature of these problems indicates the need to develop complex interventions and assessments to aid management of hyperacusis. Current hyperacusis questionnaires may be useful in identifying some problem domains, but further assessment thorough patient interviews is required to fully explore all potential problems and make informed decisions about treatment.

Determining the Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Tinnitus, Depression, and Anxiety: A Systematic Review.

(1) Background: Tinnitus is the awareness of a sound in the absence of an external source. It affects around 10-15% of people, a significant proportion of whom also experience symptoms such as depression or anxiety that negatively affect their quality of life. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a technique involving constant low-intensity direct current delivered via scalp electrodes. It is a potential treatment option for tinnitus, as well as tinnitus-related conditions such as depression and anxiety. This systematic review estimates the effects of tDCS on outcomes relevant to tinnitus. In addition, it sheds light on the relationship between stimulation parameters and the effect of tDCS on these outcomes; (2) Methods: Exhaustive searches of electronic databases were conducted. Randomised controlled trials were included if they reported at least one of the following outcomes: tinnitus symptom severity, anxiety, or depression. Where available, data on quality of life, adverse effects, and neurophysiological changes were also reviewed. GRADE was used to assess the certainty in the estimate; (3) Results: Meta-analyses revealed a statistically significant reduction in tinnitus (moderate certainty) and depression (low certainty)-but not anxiety-following active tDCS compared to sham control. Network meta-analyses revealed potential optimal stimulation parameters; (4) Conclusions: The evidence synthesised in this review suggests tDCS has the potential to reduce symptom severity in tinnitus and depression. It further narrows down the number of potentially optimal stimulation parameters.

Systematic Evaluation of the T30 Neurostimulator Treatment for Tinnitus: A Double-Blind Randomised Placebo-Controlled Trial with Open-Label Extension.

Tinnitus is often triggered by cochlear damage and has been linked with aberrant patterns of neuronal activity. Acoustic Coordinated Reset (CR®) Neuromodulation is a sound therapy hypothesised to reduce tinnitus symptoms by desynchronising pathological brain activity using a portable acoustic device (the T30 neurostimulator). We report results of a pivotal trial to test the efficacy of this intervention. This two-centre, double-blind randomised controlled trial with long-term open-label extension, was undertaken between February 2012 and February 2014 in the UK. Participants were 100 adults with tinnitus as a primary complaint, recruited through hearing clinics and media advertisements. Intervention was the device programmed either with the proprietary sound sequence or placebo algorithm, fit by one of five trained audiologists. Minimisation software provided group allocation (1:1 randomisation), with groups matched for age, gender, hearing loss and tinnitus severity. Allocation was masked from participants and assessors during the trial. The primary measure of efficacy was change in tinnitus symptom severity between groups, measured using the Tinnitus Handicap Questionnaire at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were other measures of tinnitus symptom severity, health-related quality of life, and perceptual characteristics (pitch, loudness, bandwidth) at 12 weeks, and Tinnitus Handicap Questionnaire at 36 weeks (open-label extension). A statistician blinded to the allocation conducted an intention-to-treat analysis that employed linear regressions on minimisation variables, trial centre and intervention group, with multiple imputations for missing data. The study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01541969). We screened 391 individuals and assigned interventions to 100 eligible participants. The primary outcome was not statistically significant between groups (mean group = -0.45, 95% CI -5.25 to 4.35; p = 0.85), nor were any of the secondary outcomes. Four adverse events occurred during the trial. Analysis of tinnitus symptom severity data collected across the 24-week open-label extension showed no statistically significant within-group changes after 12, 24, or 36 weeks treatment with the proprietary sound sequence. While individual participants may benefit from sound therapy, Acoustic CR® Neuromodulation did not lead to group-mean reductions on tinnitus symptom severity or other measures compared to placebo, or over time.

Experience of tinnitus in adults who have severe-to-profound hearing loss: A scoping review.

Background: Tinnitus is defined as the subjective perception of sound in the absence of an external stimulus, and tinnitus disorder becomes relevant when it is associated with emotional distress, cognitive dysfunction, and/or autonomic arousal. Hearing loss is recognized as the main risk factor for the pathogenesis of tinnitus. However, clinical guidelines for tinnitus disorder provide little direction for those who have severe-to-profound hearing loss including those who are pre-lingually Deaf. The aim of this scoping review was to catalogue what is known from the existing literature regarding the experience and management of tinnitus in adults who have a severe-to-profound hearing loss. Summary: A scoping review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for Scoping Reviews. Records were included if they reported an evaluation of tinnitus in adults who had severe-to-profound hearing loss. The online databases Ovid (MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO), CINAHL, ProQuest, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched using the search terms 'tinnitus' (as a MESH term) and 'deaf' OR 'profound hearing loss. Thirty-five records met the inclusion criteria for this review and were cataloged according to three major themes: Impact of tinnitus in deaf adults; Primary treatment of tinnitus in deaf adults; and Cochlear implant studies where tinnitus was a secondary outcome. Tinnitus symptom severity was assessed before and after intervention using tinnitus validated questionnaires in 29 records, with six further records using other assessment tools to measure tinnitus severity. Participants using cochlear implants were included in 30 studies. Medication, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), electrical promontory stimulation, and behavioral self-control therapy were each reported in single records. Key messages: This scoping review cataloged the experience, assessment, and treatment of tinnitus in adults who have severe-to-profound hearing loss. It is shown that there is very limited research reported in this field. Although this review included many records, most focused on the provision of cochlear implants for severe-to-profound hearing loss, with assessment and measurement of tinnitus as a baseline or secondary outcome. Largely missing in the literature are empirical studies that seek firstly to understand the nature of the experience of tinnitus by people with no or little residual access to external sound.