RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Tinnitus is a multifactorial phenomenon with quality-of-life detriments for those affected by it. We aim to establish a relationship between subjective tinnitus severity with objective audiometric data in the extended high frequency (EHF) from 9 to 16 khz and with distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE). We hypothesize that severe subjective tinnitus as measured by the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) does not correlate with increased hearing thresholds in the EHF range. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective. SETTING: Single Tertiary Care Center. METHODS: Patients identified with tinnitus and normal hearing thresholds within standard frequency range (250-8000 Hz) were consented for participation. Those with underlying otologic disease, trauma, radiotherapy, or ototoxic drug use were excluded. The THI questionnaire was given to eligible patients and audiometric test results were collected. THI scores were categorized by severity groups. An n = 20 to 30 was determined to have an effect size of 0.7 with a significance level of P = .05. RESULTS: THI and audiometric data were collected for 38 patients and categorized into mild (n = 18, 47.4%), moderate (n = 8, 21.1%), slight (n = 7, 18.4%), and severe (n = 5, 13.2%) tinnitus severity groups. Mean THI score was 32.3 ± 19.6 with a statistically significant difference in scores by assigned THI severity group (P < .01). There were no significant differences or linear relationship among hearing thresholds in EHF range or DPOAE stratified by subjective tinnitus group (P = .49, r2 = 0.10) CONCLUSION: Subjective tinnitus severity is not predictive of audiometric outcomes. This finding can be used as a counseling tool to help tinnitus patients manage symptoms, expectations, and overall treatment outcomes.
RESUMO
A hearing aid or a contralateral routing of signal device are options for unilateral cochlear implant listeners with limited hearing in the unimplanted ear; however, it is uncertain which device provides greater benefit beyond unilateral listening alone. Eighteen unilateral cochlear implant listeners participated in this prospective, within-participants, repeated measures study. Participants were tested with the cochlear implant alone, cochlear implant + hearing aid, and cochlear implant + contralateral routing of signal device configurations with a one-month take-home period between each in-person visit. Audiograms, speech perception in noise, and lateralization were evaluated. Subjective feedback was obtained via questionnaires. Marked improvement in speech in noise and non-implanted ear lateralization accuracy were observed with the addition of a contralateral hearing aid. There were no significant differences in speech recognition between listening configurations. However, the chronic device use questionnaires and the final device selection showed a clear preference for the hearing aid in spatial awareness and communication domains. Individuals with limited hearing in their unimplanted ears demonstrate significant improvement with the addition of a contralateral device. Subjective questionnaires somewhat contrast with clinic-based outcome measures, highlighting the delicate decision-making process involved in clinically advising one device or another to maximize communication benefits.
