A Sound Therapy-Based Intervention to Expand the Auditory Dynamic Range for Loudness among Persons with Sensorineural Hearing Losses: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial
Open accessAbstract
The primary aim of this research was to evaluate the validity, efficacy, and generalization of principles underlying a sound therapy-based treatment for promoting expansion of the auditory dynamic range (DR) for loudness. The basic sound therapy principles, originally devised for treatment of hyperacusis among patients with tinnitus, were evaluated in this study in a target sample of unsuccessfully fit and/or problematic prospective hearing aid users with diminished DRs (owing to their elevated audiometric thresholds and reduced sound tolerance). Secondary aims included: (1) delineation of the treatment contributions from the counseling and sound therapy components to the full-treatment protocol and, in turn, the isolated treatment effects from each of these individual components to intervention success; and (2) characterization of the respective dynamics for full, partial, and control treatments. Thirty-six participants with bilateral sensorineural hearing losses and reduced DRs, which affected their actual or perceived ability to use hearing aids, were enrolled in and completed a placebo-controlled (for sound therapy) randomized clinical trial. The 2 × 2 factorial trial design was implemented with or without various assignments of counseling and sound therapy. Specifically, participants were assigned randomly to one of four treatment groups (nine participants per group), including: (1) group 1-full treatment achieved with scripted counseling plus sound therapy implemented with binaural sound generators; (2) group 2-partial treatment achieved with counseling and placebo sound generators (PSGs); (3) group 3-partial treatment achieved with binaural sound generators alone; and (4) group 4-a neutral control treatment implemented with the PSGs alone. Repeated measurements of categorical loudness judgments served as the primary outcome measure. The full-treatment categorical-loudness judgments for group 1, measured at treatment termination, were significantly greater than the corresponding pretreatment judgments measured at baseline at 500, 2,000, and 4,000 Hz. Moreover, increases in their "uncomfortably loud" judgments (∼12 dB over the range from 500 to 4,000 Hz) were superior to those measured for either of the partial-treatment groups 2 and 3 or for control group 4. Efficacy, assessed by treatment-related criterion increases ≥ 10 dB for judgments of uncomfortable loudness, was superior for full treatment (82% efficacy) compared with that for either of the partial treatments (25% and 40% for counseling combined with the placebo sound therapy and sound therapy alone, respectively) or for the control treatment (50%). The majority of the group 1 participants achieved their criterion improvements within 3 months of beginning treatment. The treatment effect from sound therapy was much greater than that for counseling, which was statistically indistinguishable in most of our analyses from the control treatment. The basic principles underlying the full-treatment protocol are valid and have general applicability for expanding the DR among individuals with sensorineural hearing losses, who may often report aided loudness problems. The positive full-treatment effects were superior to those achieved for either counseling or sound therapy in virtual or actual isolation, respectively; however, the delivery of both components in the full-treatment approach was essential for an optimum treatment outcome.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The RCTs using patients with a primary complaint or secondary complaint of hyperacusis provided empirical evidence for the combination of counselling and sound therapy components (full treatment) being of more benefit than the single components.
“the RCTs using patients with a primary complaint [21] or secondary complaint of hyperacusis [30] did provide empirical evidence for the combination of the counselling and sound therapy components (full treatment) being of more benefit than the single components”
From Clinical Interventions for Hyperacusis in Adults: A Scoping Review to Assess the Current Position and Determine Priorities for Research (2017) · cites this paper as [30]
Overall, only five of the 43 studies used a RCT design.
“Overall, only five of the 43 studies used a RCT design [18, 20, 21, 30, 47]”
From Clinical Interventions for Hyperacusis in Adults: A Scoping Review to Assess the Current Position and Determine Priorities for Research (2017) · cites this paper as [30]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 41
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- Hazell JWP, Sheldrake JB. Hyperacusis and tinni- tus. In: Aran JM, Dauman R, eds. Tinnitus 91. Proceedings of the Fourth International Tinnitus Seminar. Amsterdam/New York: Kugler Publica- tions; 1992:245-248
- Jastreboff PJ, Hazell J. Tinnitus Retraining Thera- py: Implementing the Neurophysiological Model. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2004
- Schmitz HD. Loudness discomfort level modifica- tion. J Speech Hear Res 1969;12(4):807-817
- Formby C, Gold SL, Keaser ML, Block KL, Hawley ML. Secondary benefits from tinnitus retraining therapy (TRT): clinically significant in- creases in loudness discomfort level and in the auditory dynamic range. Semin Hear 2007;28(4): 276-294
- Reich G, Vernon J, eds. Proceedings of the Fifth International Tinnitus Seminar. Portland, OR: American Tinnitus Association; 1995
- Hazell JWP, ed. Proceedings of the Sixth Interna- tional Tinnitus Seminar. London, UK: The Tinni- tus and Hyperacusis Centre; 1999
- Patuzzi R, ed. Proceedings of the Seventh Interna- tional Tinnitus Seminar. Perth, Australia: The University of Western Australia; 2002
- Jastreboff PJ. Clinical implication of the neuro- physiological model of tinnitus. In: Reich GE, Vernon JA, eds. Proceedings of the 5th Interna- tional Tinnitus Seminar. Portland, OR: American Tinnitus Association; 1994:500-507
- Muller KE, Fetterman BA. Regression and AN- OVA: An Integrated Approach Using SAS Soft- ware. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.; 2002:330-333
- Gordis L. Epidemiology. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2009
- McKinney CJ, Hazell JWP, Graham RL. Changes in loudness discomfort level and sensi- tivity to environmental sound with habituation based therapy. In: Hazell J, ed. Proceedings of the Sixth International Tinnitus Seminar. Lon- don, UK: The Tinnitus and Hyperacusis Centre; 1999:499-501
- Hazell JWP, Sheldrake JB, Graham RL. Decreased sound tolerance: predisposing factors, triggers and outcomes after TRT. In: Patuzzi R, ed. Proceed- ings of the Seventh International Tinnitus Semi- nar. Crawley, Perth, Australia: University of Western Australia; 2002:255-261
- Gold SL, Formby C, Frederick EA, Suter C. Incremental shifts in loudness discomfort level among tinnitus patients with and without hyper- acusis. In: Patuzzi R, ed. Proceedings of the Seventh International Tinnitus Seminar. Crawley, Perth, Australia: University of Western Australia; 2002:170-172
- Authors
- Hawley, M., Sherlock, L., Gold, S., Payne, J., Brooks, R., Parton, J., Juneau, R., Desporte, E., Siegle, G., & Formby, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Iowa (US)
- Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (US)
- University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
- University of Alabama (US)
- General Hearing Instruments, Harahan, Louisiana
- Corresponding author
- Formby, Craig
- Venue
- Seminars in Hearing
- Publisher
- Georg Thieme Verlag KG
- Published
- 2015-04-08
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 02
- Pages
- 077-110
- ISSN
- 0734-0451 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-8955
- PMC
- PMC4906300
- OpenAlex
- W2318140505
- Cited by
- 41
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 9
- FWCI
- 2.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Seminars in Hearing (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R01DC004678)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Noise Effects and Management
- Keywords
- sound therapy, loudness perception, sensorineural hearing loss, hearing aid users, hyperacusis, tinnitus, sound tolerance, counseling, treatment efficacy, medication adherence
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review