Search

As for hypertension, chronic pain, epilepsy and other disorders with particular symptoms, a commonly accepted and unambiguous definition provides a common ground for researchers and clinicians to study and treat the problem. The WHO's ICD11 definition only mentions tinnitus as a nonspecific symptom of a hearing disorder, but not as a clinical entity in its own right, and the American Psychiatric Association's DSM-V doesn't mention tinnitus at all. Here we propose that the tinnitus without and with associated suffering should be differentiated by distinct terms: “Tinnitus” for the former and “Tinnitus Disorder” for the latter. The proposed definition then becomes “Tinnitus is the conscious awareness of a tonal or composite noise for which there is no identifiable corresponding external acoustic source, which becomes Tinnitus Disorder “when associated with emotional distress, cognitive dysfunction, and/or autonomic arousal, leading to behavioural changes and functional disability.”. In other words “Tinnitus” describes the auditory or sensory component, whereas “Tinnitus Disorder” reflects the auditory component and the associated suffering. Whereas acute tinnitus may be a symptom secondary to a trauma or disease, chronic tinnitus may be considered a primary disorder in its own right. If adopted, this will advance the recognition of tinnitus disorder as a primary health condition in its own right. The capacity to measure the incidence, prevalence, and impact will help in identification of human, financial, and educational needs required to address acute tinnitus as a symptom but chronic tinnitus as a disorder. © 2021 Elsevier B.V.

Tinnitus is the perception of a phantom sound and the patient's reaction to it. Although much progress has been made, tinnitus remains a scientific and clinical enigma of high prevalence and high economic burden, with an estimated prevalence of 10%–20% among the adult population. The EU is funding a new collaborative project entitled “Unification of Treatments and Interventions for Tinnitus Patients” (UNITI, grant no. 848261) under its Horizon 2020 framework. The main goal of the UNITI project is to set the ground for a predictive computational model based on existing and longitudinal data attempting to address the question of which treatment or combination of treatments is optimal for a specific patient group based on certain parameters. Clinical, epidemiological, genetic and audiological data, including signals reflecting ear-brain communication, as well as patients' medical history, will be analyzed making use of existing databases. Predictive factors for different patient groups will be extracted and their prognostic relevance validated through a Randomized Clinical Trial (RCT) in which different patient groups will undergo a combination of tinnitus therapies targeting both auditory and central nervous systems. From a scientific point of view, the UNITI project can be summarized into the following research goals: (1) Analysis of existing data: Results of existing clinical studies will be analyzed to identify subgroups of patients with specific treatment responses and to identify systematic differences between the patient groups at the participating clinical centers. (2) Genetic and blood biomarker analysis: High throughput Whole Exome Sequencing (WES) will be performed in well-characterized chronic tinnitus cases, together with Proximity Extension Assays (PEA) for the identification of blood biomarkers for tinnitus. (3) RCT: A total of 500 patients will be recruited at five clinical centers across Europe comparing single treatments against combinational treatments. The four main treatments are Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), hearing aids, sound stimulation, and structured counseling. The consortium will also make use of e/m-health applications for the treatment and assessment of tinnitus. (4) Decision Support System: An innovative Decision Support System will be implemented, integrating all available parameters (epidemiological, clinical, audiometry, genetics, socioeconomic and medical history) to suggest specific examinations and the optimal intervention strategy based on the collected data. (5) Financial estimation analysis: A cost-effectiveness analysis for the respective interventions will be calculated to investigate the economic effects of the interventions based on quality-adjusted life years. In this paper, we will present the UNITI project, the scientific questions that it aims to address, the research consortium, and the organizational structure. © 2021 Elsevier B.V.

Tinnitus is not traceable to a single disease or pathology, but merely a symptom, which is distressing to some but not all individuals able to perceive it. The experience of tinnitus does not equate to tinnitus distress. Tinnitus suffering might be understood as a function of tinnitus-related distress in that bothersome tinnitus is an illness rather than a disease. In bothersome (distressing) tinnitus, the perception of the characteristic sound is a very disturbing and bothersome experience because of maladaptive psychological responses. Several cognitive and behavioral theoretical frameworks attempting to explain the nature and cause of tinnitus suffering have been introduced in and will be summarized here. Current treatment approaches are generally based on models that aim to: alleviate the perceptional experience by focusing on the tinnitus perception for habituation or even soothing purposes; decrease awareness of the sound by attentional training and cognitive interventions; decrease the maladaptive responses and the resulting distress by behavioral methods (i. e., exposure). The cognitive behavioral fear-avoidance model may offer an integrative cognitive behavioral approach that can lead to a new set of paradigms for studying the underlying mechanisms explaining chronic tinnitus suffering as well for developing innovative strategies to treat bothersome tinnitus.

BACKGROUND: Tinnitus affects up to 21% of the adult population with an estimated 1% to 3% experiencing severe problems. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a collection of psychological treatments based on the cognitive and behavioural traditions in psychology and often used to treat people suffering from tinnitus. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects and safety of CBT for tinnitus in adults. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the ENT Trials Register; CENTRAL (2019, Issue 11); 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 25 November 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of CBT versus no intervention, audiological care, tinnitus retraining therapy or any other active treatment in adult participants with tinnitus. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were the impact of tinnitus on disease-specific quality of life and serious adverse effects. Our secondary outcomes were: depression, anxiety, general health-related quality of life, negatively biased interpretations of tinnitus and other adverse effects. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included 28 studies (mostly from Europe) with a total of 2733 participants. All participants had had tinnitus for at least three months and their average age ranged from 43 to 70 years. The duration of the CBT ranged from 3 to 22 weeks and it was mostly conducted in hospitals or online. There were four comparisons and we were interested in outcomes at end of treatment, and 6 and 12 months follow-up. The results below only refer to outcomes at end of treatment due to an absence of evidence at the other follow-up time points. CBT versus no intervention/wait list control Fourteen studies compared CBT with no intervention/wait list control. For the primary outcome, CBT may reduce the impact of tinnitus on quality of life at treatment end (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.83 to -0.30; 10 studies; 537 participants; low certainty). Re-expressed as a score on the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI; range 0 to 100) this is equivalent to a score 10.91 points lower in the CBT group, with an estimated minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for this scale being 7 points. Seven studies, rated as moderate certainty, either reported or informed us via personal communication about serious adverse effects. CBT probably results in little or no difference in adverse effects: six studies reported none and in one study one participant in the CBT condition worsened (risk ratio (RR) 3.00, 95% CI 0.13 to 69.87). For the secondary outcomes, CBT may result in a slight reduction in depression (SMD -0.34, 95% CI-0.60 to -0.08; 8 studies; 502 participants; low certainty). However, we are uncertain whether CBT reduces anxiety, improves health-related quality of life or reduces negatively biased interpretations of tinnitus (all very low certainty). From seven studies, no other adverse effects were reported (moderate certainty). CBT versus audiological care Three studies compared CBT with audiological care. CBT probably reduces the impact of tinnitus on quality of life when compared with audiological care as measured by the THI (range 0 to 100; mean difference (MD) -5.65, 95% CI -9.79 to -1.50; 3 studies; 444 participants) (moderate certainty; MCID = 7 points). No serious adverse effects occurred in the two included studies reporting these, thus risk ratios were not calculated (moderate certainty). The evidence suggests that CBT may slightly reduce depression but may result in little or no difference in anxiety or health-related quality of life (all low certainty) when compared with audiological care. CBT may reduce negatively biased interpretations of tinnitus when compared with audiological care (low certainty). No other adverse effects were reported for either group (moderate certainty). CBT versus tinnitus retraining therapy (TRT) One study compared CBT with TRT (including bilateral sound generators as per TRT protocol). CBT may reduce the impact of tinnitus on quality of life as measured by the THI when compared with TRT (range 0 to 100) (MD -15.79, 95% CI -27.91 to -3.67; 1 study; 42 participants; low certainty). For serious adverse effects three participants deteriorated during the study: one in the CBT (n = 22) and two in the TRT group (n = 20) (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.64; low certainty). We are uncertain whether CBT reduces depression and anxiety or improves health-related quality of life (low certainty). CBT may reduce negatively biased interpretations of tinnitus. No data were available for other adverse effects. CBT versus other active control Sixteen studies compared CBT with another active control (e.g. relaxation, information, Internet-based discussion forums). CBT may reduce the impact of tinnitus on quality of life when compared with other active treatments (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.05; 12 studies; 966 participants; low certainty). Re-expressed as a THI score this is equivalent to 5.84 points lower in the CBT group than the other active control group (MCID = 7 points). One study reported that three participants deteriorated: one in the CBT and two in the information only group (RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.16 to 18.36; low certainty). CBT may reduce depression and anxiety (both low certainty). We are uncertain whether CBT improves health-related quality of life compared with other control. CBT probably reduces negatively biased interpretations of tinnitus compared with other treatments. No data were available for other adverse effects. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: CBT may be effective in reducing the negative impact that tinnitus can have on quality of life. There is, however, an absence of evidence at 6 or 12 months follow-up. There is also some evidence that adverse effects may be rare in adults with tinnitus receiving CBT, but this could be further investigated. CBT for tinnitus may have small additional benefit in reducing symptoms of depression although uncertainty remains due to concerns about the quality of the evidence. Overall, there is limited evidence for CBT for tinnitus improving anxiety, health-related quality of life or negatively biased interpretations of tinnitus. ispartof: Cochrane Database Of Systematic Reviews vol:1 issue:1 ispartof: location:England status: Published online