The Tinnitus Retraining Therapy Counseling Protocol as Implemented in the Tinnitus Retraining Therapy Trial

Counseling Protocol for a Transitional Intervention for Debilitating Hyperacusis

INTRODUCTION

This clinical focus article describes a structured counseling protocol for use with protected sound management and therapeutic sound in a transitional intervention for debilitating hyperacusis. The counseling protocol and its associated visual aids are crafted as a teaching tool to educate affected individuals about hyperacusis and encourage their acceptance of a transitional intervention.

DESCRIPTION OF COUNSELING COMPONENTS

The counseling protocol includes five components. First, the patient's audiometric results are reviewed with the patient, and the transitional intervention is introduced. An overview of peripheral auditory structures and central neural pathways and the concept of central gain are covered in the second and third components. Maladaptive hyper-gain processes within the auditory neural pathways, which underlie the hyperacusis condition, and associated connections with nonauditory processes responsible for negative reactions to hyperacusis are covered in the fourth component. Detrimental effects from misused hearing protection devices (HPDs) and the necessity to wean the patient from overuse of HPDs are also discussed. In the fifth component, the importance of therapeutic sound is introduced as a tool to downregulate hyper-gain activity within the auditory pathways; its implementation in uncontrolled and controlled sound environments is described. It is explained that, over the course of the transitional intervention, recalibration of the hyper-gain processes will be ongoing, leading to restoration of normal homeostasis within the auditory pathways. In turn, associated activation of reactive nonauditory processes, which contribute to hyperacusis-related distress, will be reduced or eliminated. As recalibration progresses, there will be less need for protected sound management and sound therapy. Sound tolerance will improve, hyperacusis will subside, and daily activities in typical healthy sound environments will again become routine.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The combination of counseling with protected sound management and therapeutic sound is highlighted in companion reports, including a summary of the outcomes of a successful trial of the transitional intervention.

Contributions of Counseling and Sound Generator Use in Tinnitus Retraining Therapy: Treatment Response Dynamics Assessed in a Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Trial

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 = .020), borderline significant for TRT versus pTRT (p = .057), but nonsignificant for pTRT versus SOC (p = .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).