ERIC Number: EJ1342163
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2022-Feb
Pages: 13
Abstractor: As Provided
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: ISSN-1092-4388
EISSN: N/A
Available Date: N/A
Contributions of Counseling and Sound Generator Use in Tinnitus Retraining Therapy: Treatment Response Dynamics Assessed in a Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Trial
Formby, Craig; Yang, Xin; Scherer, Roberta W.
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, v65 n2 p816-828 Feb 2022
Purpose: Tinnitus retraining therapy (TRT) has been widely used for 30 years, but its efficacy and the component contributions from counseling and sound therapy remain controversial. The purpose of this secondary analysis from the Tinnitus Retraining Therapy Trial (TRTT) was to compare treatment response dynamics for TRT (counseling and conventional sound generators) with partial TRT (pTRT; counseling and placebo sound generators) and standard of care (SOC; a patient-centered counseling control). Method: The TRTT randomized 151 participants with primary tinnitus ("no significant hearing or sound tolerance problems") to TRT, pTRT, or SOC, each of which encouraged use of enriched environmental sound. The primary outcome, mean change in Tinnitus Questionnaire score assessed at baseline and follow-up across 18 months, was normalized for a common baseline and fitted with an exponential model. Time constants were estimated to quantify and compare the treatment response dynamics, which were evaluated for statistical significance using bootstrap analyses. Results: The change in response to TRT took less time to achieve than that for either pTRT or SOC, as demonstrated by time for normalized Tinnitus Questionnaire scores to decline to 63% and 99% of baseline TRT values: 1.2 months (95% CI [0.2, 1.9]) and 5.7 months (95% CI [0.9, 9.0]), respectively. Corresponding SOC values were 2.7 months (95% CI [1.5, 4.1]) and 12.4 months (95% CI [6.9, 19.0]), while those for pTRT were 2.2 months (95% CI [1.2, 3.4]) and 10.1 months (95% CI [5.7, 15.9]). The differences were significant for TRT versus SOC (p = 0.020), borderline significant for TRT versus pTRT (p = 0.057), but nonsignificant for pTRT versus SOC (p = 0.285). The magnitude of the asymptotic treatment response did not differ significantly among groups. Conclusion: Sound generator use in TRT increases treatment efficiency (beyond any advantage from enriched environmental sound) without affecting treatment efficacy (determined by counseling). [The article was written with The Tinnitus Retraining Therapy Trial (TRTT) Research Group.]
Descriptors: Hearing Impairments, Therapy, Counseling, Acoustics, Equipment, Outcomes of Treatment, Program Effectiveness, Brain, Neurological Impairments, Training, Adults
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. 2200 Research Blvd #250, Rockville, MD 20850. Tel: 301-296-5700; Fax: 301-296-8580; e-mail: slhr@asha.org; Web site: http://jslhr.pubs.asha.org
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Reports - Research
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) (DHHS/NIH)
Authoring Institution: N/A
Grant or Contract Numbers: U01DC007411; U01DC007422
Author Affiliations: N/A