|
|
 |
| The effectiveness of sound therapy-based tinnitus treatment |
A summary prepared by Jeffrey J. DiGiovanni, Ph.D., CCC-A
"Tinnitus masking and [Tinnitus Retraining Therapy] TRT are two frequently used methods for clinical management of tinnitus. Both of these methods have a long history of development, application, and refinement, as well as a track record of clinical success." Henry et al. (2002, p.560).
The "VA is committed to implementing nationally developed, evidence-based practice guidelines to improve health-care outcomes and efficiency in the veteran patient population." Management Decision and Research Center, Department of Veterans Affairs, 1998; Feussner 1998).
Introduction
Tinnitus Retraining Therapy (TRT) and Tinnitus masking (TM) are the two most common therapies designed to treat tinnitus, both prescribe sound therapy in the moderate and severe cases. TRT is a therapy protocol that is designed to help the sufferer habituate to their tinnitus according to a neurophysiologic model. In the TRT, once the assessment of the tinnitus is made, a combination of direct counseling and sound therapy is provided. The sound therapy is a critical component that allows an externally generated sound to "blend" with the sufferers' tinnitus. Generally, the therapy can last up to 18 months. TM, on the other hand, is a protocol designed for immediate relief. In that regard, the sound therapy is presented at a level that masks the tinnitus, therefore providing relief to the sufferer.
Tinnitus sufferers fit into one of five categories as described by Jastreboff and Hazell (2004). Otothera, Inc.'s primary target includes Categories 1 and 2, and is generally the more severely afflicted. Category 1 includes patients that "have tinnitus of high severity as their predominant complaint and do not have other hearing-related problems (p. 82). These patients are prescribed direct counseling along with a wearable sound generator played at a loudness that blends with the tinnitus. Category 2 includes patients who "have tinnitus coexisting with hearing loss" (p. 83). These patients are prescribed direct counseling and hearing aids. They are also instructed to enrich their listening experience with outside sounds to alleviate the effects of tinnitus.
Review of Literature
Several studies have been performed assessing the efficacy of the TRT and TM. The more recent studies employed a more rigorous and controlled methods. Therefore, the more recent studies will be reviewed and the less controlled studies will be used as supporting evidence to the more recent, controlled studies.
Henry et al. (2006) conducted a controlled, clinical study which included 118 patients from a pool of in an 18-month study investigating the efficacy of TRT and TM. Five validated assessment tools were used to assess the severity of the tinnitus before, during and after the treatment. These tools have been validated for internal consistency and reliability. Of their extensive findings, TRT was found to me more effective in severe cases of tinnitus, though TM was effective. However, in moderate cases of tinnitus, both TRT and TM were similarly effective. Specifically, the more severely afflicted patients were aware of their tinnitus 77.8% of time before the TM therapy and only 33.2% after 18 months of TM therapy. Patients treated with TRT were ware of their tinnitus 66.5% of the time before treatment and only 14.7% of the timer after 18 months. In terms of how much of the time patients were annoyed by their tinnitus, the TM-treated patients were annoyed 52.6% of the time before and 24.2% of the time after 18-months of the TM therapy, while TRT-treated patients were annoyed 47.3% of the time before and 6.3% of the time after treatment. Overall, 88% of their patients treated with TRT showed significant improvements (greater than or equal to a 5 point improvement on the Tinnitus Severity Index) (Henry as cited in Jastreboff & Jastreboff, 2006).
In an interesting study investigated the effectiveness of the use of ear-level devices, which included hearing aids and noise generators (Folmer & Carroll, 2006). 150 patients were split evenly into three groups: a hearing aid group, a noise generator group, and a control group that did not use any ear-level device. All three groups participated in other aspects of tinnitus treatment that did not include sound therapy. While all three groups showed improvement after 18 months, the groups that used ear-level devices showed greater improvement. They concluded that ear-level devices offer benefits beyond that of other tinnitus therapy (e.g. counseling) alone.
Herraiz et al. (2005) studied TRT using 158 tinnitus patients over a period of 12 months. According to a self evaluation of the patients, a 78% and 82% improvement was observed after 6 and 12 months, respectively. Patients who followed through on the TRT treatment improved more so than patients who dropped out.
Jastreboff (1998) reported 152 consecutive patients who received treatment for a six-month period. Success was defined as a minimum of 20 percent improvement in two of three outcome areas (performance of daily activities affected by tinnitus, annoying owing to tinnitus, and percentage of time of tinnitus awareness). 129 of 152 patients used sound therapy and direct counseling. They reported 81.4% of these patients met the success criteria. Similarly, Jastreboff (1999) reported date from 223 patients from his clinic, all of which used sound therapy. Employing the same criteria for success as Jastreboff (1998), he reported an 81% improvement.
Sheldrake et al. (1999) performed a retrospective study of 483 patients from the London Tinnitus and Hyperacusis Center. Of this pool, 224 patients received the full TRT. Their criteria for improvement were a 40% improvement in annoyance and awareness, or a 40% improvement in annoyance or awareness plus an improvement/facilitation of a life factor. 83.9% of the 224 TRT patients met these rather strict criteria.
McKinney et al. (1999) included 182 patients to study the benefit of tinnitus therapy. Success was met when a minimum of a 40% percent improvement in two or more scales evaluating the effects of tinnitus, including annoyance (from the tinnitus), impact of tinnitus on quality of life, tinnitus loudness, and percentage of time of awareness. Of the 182 patients, 148 received counseling and sound therapy (54 counseling only; 72 ear-level sound generators; 56 hearing aids). Of those that received counseling only, 72.2% improved. Of those who used hearing aids only, 70.7% improved. 75% of the patients improved with sound generators set to 'just audible level', which is below what would normally be prescribed. For those receiving the 'truest' form of TRT (higher level of sound presentation), 83.3% improved. These various success figures give a range of what would be a reasonable expected benefit given the various treatments. However, data from this and the other studies discussed support the notion that benefit is maximized when sound therapy is used as part of TRT.
Bartnik et al. (1999) studied the benefits of TRT by randomly selecting 120 patients from a pool of 556. They created five groups based on severity. Each group included 24 patients. All patients were treated for at least 12 months. Overall, 77.6% of the patients improved. 75% of patients with hyperacusis as the primary complaint improved. 93% of the patients with mild tinnitus (Category 0) Improved. Patients with severe tinnitus (Category 1) and severe tinnitus with hearing loss (Category 2) improved at a rate of 83% and 71%, respectively. Finally, 67% of the patients with prolonged, loud tinnitus (Category 4) improved. It should be reiterated that the Category 1 and 2 patients have been identified as the best candidates for the Otothera, Inc.'s, device.
Herraiz et al. (1999) reported follow-up evaluations from 84 patients after a year of tinnitus treatment. Three criteria were used to determine significant improvement: patient report of improvement (better, worse, or no change), Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (Newman et al., 1998), and visual analog scale of tinnitus intensity. Of their patient pool, 37% received direct counseling, 37% received counseling plus sound therapy, 46% received counseling plus hearing aids. Of those that received counseling only 93.7% improved. For the patients that received counseling along with sound therapy, 83.3% improved. For those that received counseling plus hearing aids, 84.2% improved. Overall, 88.1% success rate was noted for all three groups combined.
Conclusion
From the nine studies reviewed, several trends become apparent. First, that most therapies are some form of TRT or TM that include sound therapy with or without counseling. Second, there is a great deal of variability in how the TRT and TM are employed. Finally, despite the variability of treatment protocol, the use of sound therapy as part of tinnitus therapy show a consistent success rate that typically exceeds 80%. The consistency and high-level of success across all these studies supports the use of sound therapy in tinnitus therapy regimens.
References
Bartnik G, Faijanska J, Rogowski M. (1999). Our experience in treatment of patients with tinnitus and/or hyperacusis using the habituation method. In: Hazell JWP, Ed. Proceedings of the Sixth International Tinnitus Seminar 1999. London: The Tinnitus and Hyperacusis Centre, 415-417.
Feussner J. (1998) Clinical research in the Department of Veterans Affiars: using research to improve patient outcomes. J Invest Med 46:264-267.
Folmer RL, and Carroll JR. (2006). Long-term effectiveness of ear-level devices for tinnitus. Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery 134, 132-137.
Henry JA. Effectiveness of TRT judged by Tinnitus Severity Index, pers. Communication.
Henry, JA, Schechter, MA, Nagler, SM, Fausti, SA (2002). Comparison of tinnitus masking and tinnitus retraining therapy. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 13, 559-581.
Henry, JA, Schechter MA, Zaugg TL, Griest S, Jastreboff PJ, Vernon JA, Kaelin C, Meikle MB, Lyons KS, Stewart BJ. (2006). Outcomes of clinical trial: tinnitus masking versus tinnitus retraining therapy. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 17, 104-132.
Herraiz C, Hernandez FJ, Machado A et al. (1999). Tinnitus retraining therapy: our experience. In: Hazell JWP, ed. Proceedings of the Sixth International Tinnitus Seminar 1999. London: The Tinnitus and Hyperacusis Centre, 483-484.
Herraiz C, Hernandez FJ, Plaza G, and de los Santos, G. (2005). Long-term clinical trial of Tinnitus Retraining Therapy. Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery 133, 774-779.
Jastreboff, PJ. (1998). Tinnitus: the method of Pawel J. Jastreboff. In Gates G, ed. Current Therapy in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. St. Louis: Mosby-YearBook, 90-95.
Jastreboff PJ. (1999). Categories of the patients in TRT and the treatment outcome. In: Hazell JWP, ed. Proceedings of the Sixth International Tinnitus Seminar 1999. London: The Tinnitus and Hyperacusis Centre, 394-398.
Jastreboff PJ and Jastreboff MM. (2006). Tinnitus Retraining Therapy: A different view on tinnitus. ORL, 68, 23-30.
Jastreboff PJ, Hazell JW. (2004). Tinnitus Retraining Therapy: Implementing the Neurophysiologic Model. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Management Decision and Research Center, Departmnet of Veterans Affairs. (1998) Clinical Practice Guidelines. Boston: Management Decision and Research Center; Washington, DC: VA Health Services Research and Development Service in collaboration with Association for Health Services Research.
McKinney, CJ, Hazell JWP, Graham RL. (1999). An evaluation of the TRT method. In: Hazell JWP, ed. Proceedings of the Sixth International Tinnitus Seminar 1999. London: The Tinnitus and Hyperacusis Centre, 99-105.
Sheldrake JB, Hazell JWP, Graham RL. (1999). Results of tinnitus retraining therapy. In: Hazell JWP, ed. Proceedings of the Sixth International Tinnitus Seminar 1999. London: The Tinnitus and Hyperacusis Centre, 292-296.
|
|
|
|
