“…Thus, hearing loss, one of the factors affecting listening effort, 2 was ruled out. However, although hearing thresholds (0.125‐20 kHz) did not differ between groups, tinnitus patients may have differences in the proximal and distal central auditory pathways 31,32 . Listening effort is also affected by central auditory processing skills 33,34 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…However, although hearing thresholds (0.125-20 kHz) did not differ between groups, tinnitus patients may have differences in the proximal and distal central auditory pathways. 31,32 Listening effort is also affected by central auditory processing skills. 33,34 Therefore, central auditory processing skills may explain the listening effort observed in tinnitus patients in the present study.…”
ObjectivePrevious behavioral studies on listening effort in tinnitus patients did not consider extended high‐frequency hearing thresholds and had conflicting results. This inconsistency may be related that listening effort is not evaluated by the central nervous system (CNS) and autonomic nervous system (ANS), which are directly related to tinnitus pathophysiology. This study matches hearing thresholds at all frequencies, including the extended high‐frequency and reduces hearing loss to objectively evaluate listening effort over the CNS and ANS simultaneously in tinnitus patients.Study DesignCase‐control study.SettingUniversity hospital.MethodsSixteen chronic tinnitus patients and 23 matched healthy controls having normal pure‐tone averages with symmetrical hearing thresholds were included. Subjects were evaluated with 0.125 to 20 kHz pure‐tone audiometry, Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test (MoCA), Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), electroencephalography (EEG), and pupillometry.ResultsPupil dilation and EEG alpha band in the “coding” phase of the sentence presented in tinnitus patients was less than in the control group (p < .05). VAS score was higher in the tinnitus group (p < .01). Also, there was no statistically significant relationship between EEG and pupillometry components and THI or MoCA (p > .05).ConclusionThis study suggests that tinnitus patients may need to make an extra effort to listen. Also, pupillometry may not be sufficiently reliable to assess listening effort in ANS‐related pathologies. Considering the possible listening difficulties in tinnitus patients, reducing the listening difficulties, especially in noisy environments, can be added to the goals of tinnitus therapy protocols.
“…Thus, hearing loss, one of the factors affecting listening effort, 2 was ruled out. However, although hearing thresholds (0.125‐20 kHz) did not differ between groups, tinnitus patients may have differences in the proximal and distal central auditory pathways 31,32 . Listening effort is also affected by central auditory processing skills 33,34 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…However, although hearing thresholds (0.125-20 kHz) did not differ between groups, tinnitus patients may have differences in the proximal and distal central auditory pathways. 31,32 Listening effort is also affected by central auditory processing skills. 33,34 Therefore, central auditory processing skills may explain the listening effort observed in tinnitus patients in the present study.…”
ObjectivePrevious behavioral studies on listening effort in tinnitus patients did not consider extended high‐frequency hearing thresholds and had conflicting results. This inconsistency may be related that listening effort is not evaluated by the central nervous system (CNS) and autonomic nervous system (ANS), which are directly related to tinnitus pathophysiology. This study matches hearing thresholds at all frequencies, including the extended high‐frequency and reduces hearing loss to objectively evaluate listening effort over the CNS and ANS simultaneously in tinnitus patients.Study DesignCase‐control study.SettingUniversity hospital.MethodsSixteen chronic tinnitus patients and 23 matched healthy controls having normal pure‐tone averages with symmetrical hearing thresholds were included. Subjects were evaluated with 0.125 to 20 kHz pure‐tone audiometry, Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test (MoCA), Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), electroencephalography (EEG), and pupillometry.ResultsPupil dilation and EEG alpha band in the “coding” phase of the sentence presented in tinnitus patients was less than in the control group (p < .05). VAS score was higher in the tinnitus group (p < .01). Also, there was no statistically significant relationship between EEG and pupillometry components and THI or MoCA (p > .05).ConclusionThis study suggests that tinnitus patients may need to make an extra effort to listen. Also, pupillometry may not be sufficiently reliable to assess listening effort in ANS‐related pathologies. Considering the possible listening difficulties in tinnitus patients, reducing the listening difficulties, especially in noisy environments, can be added to the goals of tinnitus therapy protocols.
“…Previous studies have shown that in case of hearing loss, sound enrichment reduces spontaneous activity (Noreña & Eggermont, 2006), causes functional reorganization in the central auditory system (Noreña & Eggermont, 2005), and even plays a protective role in the auditory system by activating the dopaminergic pathway (Niu et al, 2007). It is known that maladaptive reorganization in the central auditory systems of tinnitus patients and increased spontaneous activity compared to healthy individuals have been reported in studies (Isler et al, 2022;Sendesen, Erbil, et al, 2022;Sendesen, Kaynakoglu, et al, 2022). Therefore, as a result of the current study, the improvement seen in tinnitus patients after sound enrichment treatment may be due to the functional reorganization and spontaneous activity reduction caused by sound enrichment.…”
ObjectiveIn previous animal studies, sound enhancement reduced tinnitus perception in cases associated with hearing loss. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of sound enrichment therapy in tinnitus treatment by developing a protocol that includes criteria for psychoacoustic characteristics of tinnitus to determine whether the etiology is related to hearing loss.MethodsA total of 96 patients with chronic tinnitus were included in the study. Fifty‐two patients in the study group and 44 patients in the placebo group considered residual inhibition (RI) outcomes and tinnitus pitches. Both groups received sound enrichment treatment with different spectrum contents. The tinnitus handicap inventory (THI), visual analog scale (VAS), minimum masking level (MML), and tinnitus loudness level (TLL) results were compared before and at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment.ResultsThere was a statistically significant difference between the groups in THI, VAS, MML, and TLL scores from the first month to all months after treatment (p < .01). For the study group, there was a statistically significant decrease in THI, VAS, MML, and TLL scores in the first month (p < .01). This decrease continued at a statistically significant level in the third month of posttreatment for THI (p < .05) and at all months for VAS‐1 (tinnitus severity) (p < .05) and VAS‐2 (tinnitus discomfort) (p < .05).ConclusionIn clinical practice, after excluding other factors related to the tinnitus etiology, sound enrichment treatment can be effective in tinnitus cases where RI is positive and the tinnitus pitch is matched with a hearing loss between 45 and 55 dB HL in a relatively short period of 1 month.
Tinnitus, a common disease in the clinic, is associated with persistent pain and high costs to society. Several aspects of tinnitus, such as the pathophysiology mechanism, effective treatment, objective detection, etc., have not been elucidated. Any change in the auditory pathway can lead to tinnitus. At present, there is no clear and unified mechanism to explain tinnitus, and the hypotheses regarding its mechanism include auditory plasticity theory, cortical reorganization theory, dorsal cochlear nucleus hypothesis, etc. Current theories on the mechanism of tinnitus mainly focus on the abnormal activity of the central nervous system. Unfortunately, there is currently a lack of objective diagnostic methods for tinnitus. Developing a method that can detect tinnitus objectively is crucial, only in this way can we identify whether the patient really suffers from tinnitus in the case of cognitive impairment or medical disputes and the therapeutic effect of tinnitus. Electrophysiological investigations have prompted the development of an objective detection of tinnitus by potentials recorded in the auditory pathway. However, there is no objective indicator with sufficient sensitivity and specificity to diagnose tinnitus at present. Based on recent findings of studies with various methods, possible electrophysiological approaches to detect the presence of tinnitus have been summarized. We analyze the change of neural activity throughout the auditory pathway in tinnitus subjects and in patients with tinnitus of varying severity to find available parameters in these methods, which is helpful to further explore the feasibility of using electrophysiological methods for the objective detection of tinnitus.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.