Good practice in clinical trials advocates common standards for assessing and reporting condition-specific complaints ("outcome domains"). For tinnitus, there is no common standard. The Core Outcome Measures in Tinnitus International Delphi (COMiT'ID) study created recommendations that are relevant to the most common intervention approaches for chronic subjective tinnitus in adults using consensus methods. Here, the objectives were to examine why it is important to tailor outcome domain selection to the tinnitus intervention that is being evaluated in the clinical trial and to demonstrate that the COMiT'ID recommendations are robust. The COMiT'ID study used an online three-round Delphi method with three separate surveys for sound-, psychology-, and pharmacology-based interventions. Survey data were analyzed to assess quality and confidence in the consensus achieved across surveys and stakeholder groups and between survey rounds. Results found participants were highly discriminatory in their decision-making. Of the 34 outcome domains reaching the prespecified consensus definition in the final round, 17 (50%) were unique to one intervention, while only 12 (35%) were common to all three. Robustness was demonstrated by an acceptable level of agreement across and within stakeholder groups, across survey rounds, across medical specialties (for the health-care practitioners), and across health-care users with varying tinnitus duration. There were few dissenting voices, and results showed no attrition bias. In conclusion, there is compelling evidence that one set of outcomes does not fit all therapeutic aims. Our analyses evidence robust decisions by the electronic Delphi process, leading to recommendations for three unique intervention-specific outcome domain sets. This provides an important starting point for standardization.
Residual inhibition, that is, the temporary suppression of tinnitus loudness after acoustic stimulation, is a frequently observed phenomenon that may have prognostic value for clinical applications. However, it is unclear in which subjects residual inhibition is more likely and how stable the effect of inhibition is over multiple repetitions. The primary aim of this work was to evaluate the effect of hearing loss and tinnitus chronicity on residual inhibition susceptibility. The secondary aim was to investigate the short-term repeatability of residual inhibition. Residual inhibition was assessed in 74 tinnitus subjects with 60-second narrow-band noise stimuli in 10 consecutive trials. The subjects were assigned to groups according to their depth of suppression (substantial residual inhibition vs. comparator group). In addition, a categorization in normal hearing and hearing loss groups, related to the degree of hearing loss at the frequency corresponding to the tinnitus pitch, was made. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with susceptibility to residual inhibition. Repeatability of residual inhibition was assessed using mixed-effects ordinal regression including poststimulus time and repetitions as factors. Tinnitus chronicity was not associated with residual inhibition for subjects with hearing loss, while a statistically significant negative association between tinnitus chronicity and residual inhibition susceptibility was observed in normal hearing subjects (odds ratio: 0.63; p = .0076). Moreover, repeated states of suppression can be stably induced, reinforcing the use of residual inhibition for within-subject comparison studies.
Suboptimal hearing aid use negatively impacts health and well-being. The aim of this study was to conduct a controlled trial of a behavior change intervention to promote hearing aid use. This study was a quasi-randomized controlled trial with two arms. A total of 160 first-time hearing aid users were recruited at their hearing aid fitting appointments. The control arm received standard care. In addition to standard care, the intervention arm received I-PLAN, which comprised (a) information about the consequences of hearing aid use/nonuse, (b) reminder prompt to use the hearing aids, and (c) an action plan. The primary outcome, measured at 6 weeks, was self-reported proportion of time the hearing aid was used in situations that caused hearing difficulty. Secondary outcomes were data-logged hearing aid use, self-reported hearing aid benefit, self-regulation, and habit formation. The results showed that the proportion of time the hearing aids were used in situations that caused hearing difficulty was similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in any outcome measure including data-logged hearing aid use. The relatively high levels of hearing aid use across research participants may have limited the potential for the intervention to impact on hearing aid use. Although the intervention materials proved acceptable and deliverable, future intervention trials should target suboptimal hearing aid users.
Since somatic or somatosensory tinnitus (ST) was first described as a subtype of subjective tinnitus, where altered somatosensory afference from the cervical spine or temporomandibular area causes or changes a patient's tinnitus perception, several studies in humans and animals have provided a neurophysiological explanation for this type of tinnitus. Due to a lack of unambiguous clinical tests, many authors and clinicians use their own criteria for diagnosing ST. This resulted in large differences in prevalence figures in different studies and limits the comparison of clinical trials on ST treatment. This study aimed to reach an international consensus on diagnostic criteria for ST among experts, scientists and clinicians using a Delphi survey and face-to-face consensus meeting strategy. Following recommended procedures to gain expert consensus, a two-round Delphi survey was delivered online, followed by an in-person consensus meeting. Experts agreed upon a set of criteria that strongly suggest ST. These criteria comprise items on somatosensory modulation, specific tinnitus characteristics, and symptoms that can accompany the tinnitus. None of these criteria have to be present in every single patient with ST, but in case they are present, they strongly suggest the presence of ST. Because of the international nature of the survey, we expect these criteria to gain wide acceptance in the research field and to serve as a guideline for clinicians across all disciplines. Criteria developed in this consensus paper should now allow further investigation of the extent of somatosensory influence in individual tinnitus patients and tinnitus populations.
High levels of occupational noise exposure increase the risk of hearing difficulties and tinnitus. However, differences in demographic, health, and lifestyle factors could also contribute to high levels of hearing difficulties and tinnitus in some industries. Data from a subsample (n = 22,936) of the U.K. Biobank were analyzed to determine to what extent differences in levels of hearing difficulties and tinnitus in high-risk industries (construction, agricultural, and music) compared with low-risk industries (finance) could be attributable to demographic, health, and lifestyle factors, rather than occupational noise exposure. Hearing difficulties were identified using a digits-in-noise speech recognition test. Tinnitus was identified based on self-report. Logistic regression analyses showed that occupational noise exposure partially accounted for higher levels of hearing difficulties in the agricultural industry compared with finance, and occupational noise exposure, older age, low socioeconomic status, and non-White ethnic background partially accounted for higher levels of hearing difficulties in the construction industry. However, the factors assessed in the model did not fully account for the increased likelihood of hearing difficulties in high-risk industries, suggesting that there are additional unknown factors which impact on hearing or that there was insufficient measurement of factors included in the model. The levels of tinnitus were greatest for music and construction industries compared with finance, and these differences were accounted for by occupational and music noise exposure, as well as older age. These findings emphasize the need to promote hearing conservation in occupational and music settings, with a particular focus on high-risk demographic subgroups.
Lifetime noise exposure is generally quantified by self-report. The accuracy of retrospective self-report is limited by respondent recall but is also bound to be influenced by reporting procedures. Such procedures are of variable quality in current measures of lifetime noise exposure, and off-the-shelf instruments are not readily available. The Noise Exposure Structured Interview (NESI) represents an attempt to draw together some of the stronger elements of existing procedures and to provide solutions to their outstanding limitations. Reporting is not restricted to prespecified exposure activities and instead encompasses all activities that the respondent has experienced as noisy (defined based on sound level estimated from vocal effort). Changing exposure habits over time are reported by dividing the lifespan into discrete periods in which exposure habits were approximately stable, with life milestones used to aid recall. Exposure duration, sound level, and use of hearing protection are reported for each life period separately. Simple-to-follow methods are provided for the estimation of free-field sound level, the sound level emitted by personal listening devices, and the attenuation provided by hearing protective equipment. An energy-based means of combining the resulting data is supplied, along with a primarily energy-based method for incorporating firearm-noise exposure. Finally, the NESI acknowledges the need of some users to tailor the procedures; this flexibility is afforded, and reasonable modifications are described. Competency needs of new users are addressed through detailed interview instructions (including troubleshooting tips) and a demonstration video. Limited evaluation data are available, and future efforts at evaluation are proposed.
Subjective tinnitus is a chronic heterogeneous condition that is typically managed using intervention approaches based on sound devices, psychologically informed therapies, or pharmaceutical products. For clinical trials, there are currently no common standards for assessing or reporting intervention efficacy. This article reports on the first of two steps to establish a common standard, which identifies what specific tinnitus-related complaints ("outcome domains") are critical and important to assess in all clinical trials to determine whether an intervention has worked. Using purposive sampling, 719 international health-care users with tinnitus, health-care professionals, clinical researchers, commercial representatives, and funders were recruited. Eligibility was primarily determined by experience of one of the three interventions of interest. Following recommended procedures for gaining consensus, three intervention-specific, three-round, Delphi surveys were delivered online. Each Delphi survey was followed by an in-person consensus meeting. Viewpoints and votes involved all stakeholder groups, with approximately a 1:1 ratio of health-care users to professionals. "Tinnitus intrusiveness" was voted in for all three interventions. For sound-based interventions, the minimum set included "ability to ignore," "concentration," "quality of sleep," and "sense of control." For psychology-based interventions, the minimum set included "acceptance of tinnitus," "mood," "negative thoughts and beliefs," and "sense of control." For pharmacology-based interventions, "tinnitus loudness" was the only additional core outcome domain. The second step will next identify how those outcome domains should best be measured. The uptake of these intervention-specific standards in clinical trials will improve research quality, enhance clinical decision-making, and facilitate meta-analysis in systematic reviews.