| Literature DB >> 29209267 |
Elisabeth Wallhäusser-Franke1, Roberto D'Amelio2, Anna Glauner1, Wolfgang Delb1, Jérôme J Servais3, Karl Hörmann1,3, Ines Repik3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acute tinnitus and its transition to chronic tinnitus are poorly investigated, and factors associated with amelioration versus exacerbation are largely unknown. Aims of this study were to identify early predictors for the future development of tinnitus severity.Entities:
Keywords: acute-chronic transition; anxiety; coping with illness; depression; hearing impairment; prospective study; recent-onset tinnitus
Year: 2017 PMID: 29209267 PMCID: PMC5701924 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2017.00605
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Sociodemographic factors at T1.
| Persisting tinnitus ( | Remitting ( | |
|---|---|---|
| Sex (m/f) | 53.2%/46.8% | 83.3%/16.7% |
| Age in years [mean (SD)] | 41.4 (15.6) | 41.0 (14.8) |
| Range | 21–79 | 23–61 |
| Single | 8.5% | |
| Cohabitating | 91.5% | 100% |
| None | 2.1% | – |
| Basic | 8.5% | 33.3% |
| Middle | 19.1% | – |
| University entrance | 27.6% | 33.3% |
| University degree | 42.6% | 33.3% |
| Working | 74.5% | 83.3% |
| Scholastic | 10.6% | 16.7% |
| Working in own household | 6.4% | |
| Retired | 6.4% | |
| Inability to work | 4.3% | |
| Not working because of tinnitus | 0% | |
| No/yes/no statement | 68.3%/29.3%/2.4% | 66.7%/33.3% |
Comparison of subgroups with persisting and remitting tinnitus.
| Assessment at T1/T2 | Persisting tinnitus ( | Remitting tinnitus ( |
|---|---|---|
| T-NRS | 3.95 ± 1.66 | 3.17 ± 1.72 |
| Mini-TQ12 | 8.32 ± 5.76 | No tinnitus |
| Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS)1 | 3.82 ± 2.43 | 2.00 ± 2.0 |
| SDS2 | 3.38 ± 2.15 | 2.00 ± 1.5 |
| SDS3 | 3.60 ± 2.23 | 2.00 ± 2.10 |
| Hyper-NRS | 4.66 ± 2.77 | 3.00 ± 1.50 |
| PHQ9 | 7.24 ± 4.76 | 3.83 ± 1.60 |
| GAD7 | 5.66 ± 3.85 | 3.00 ± 2.50 |
| Audiogram mean right ear | 17.74 ± 9.65 | 15.77 ± 4.25 |
| Audiogram mean left ear | 19.51 ± 9.44 | 14.13 ± 2.22 |
Means and SDs are shown.
Comparison of tinnitus characteristics between groups with persisting and remitting tinnitus.
| Tinnitus characteristics at T1 | Persisting tinnitus ( | Remitting ( |
|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | 14.9 ± 8.5 | 7.7 ± 10.7 |
| Range | 1–28 | 2–29 |
| Sudden onset | 30 (73.2%) | 3 (50%) |
| Subtle onset | 11 (26.3%) | 3 (50%) |
| Associated with hearing loss (HL) | 7 (17.1%) | 3 (50%) |
| Not associated with HL | 34 (82.9%) | 3 (50%) |
| Permanent | 28 (68.3%) | 4 (66.7%) |
| Intermittent | 13 (31.7%) | 2 (33.3%) |
| Right ear | 10 (24.4%) | 4 (66.7%) |
| Left ear | 16 (39.0%) | 1 (16.7%) |
| Both ears | 10 (24.4%) | 1 (16.7%) |
| Within head | 5 (12.2%) | 1 (16.7%) |
| None | 28 (68.3%) | 2 (33.3%) |
| Less loud | 4 (9.8%) | 4 (66.7%) |
| Louder | 7 (17.1%) | 0 |
| No statement | 2 (4.9%) | |
| None | 19 (46.3%) | 2 (33.3%) |
| Less distressing | 3 (7.3%) | 1 (16.7%) |
| More distressing | 11 (26.8%) | |
| No statement | 8 (19.5%) | 3 (50%) |
Differences between these groups exist for localization of the tinnitus, a higher frequency of sudden onset, a higher percentage with no change or increasing loudness and distress between onset and T1.
.
Figure 1Pure Tone Audiograms for groups with persisting and remitting, unilateral and bilateral tinnitus: shown are means with respective standard errors. Unilateral tinnitus: tinnitus heard from one ear, bilateral tinnitus: tinnitus heard on both ears or within the head. An audiogram was not available from one individual with persisting unilateral tinnitus and from another one with persisting bilateral tinnitus.
Figure 2Development of tinnitus complaints and variables that were identified as predictors for future tinnitus intensity for the group with low to moderate levels of depression [(A–D), blue columns], and the group with high levels of depression, [(E–H), orange-red bars]. Means and respective SEs are shown. (A,E) Awareness of the tinnitus, (B,F) perceived tinnitus loudness (T-NRS), and distress as assessed by the Sheehan scales (SDS), and (C,G) with the Mini-TQ12. (D,H) Predictor variables are levels of depression (PHQ9) and anxiety (GAD7), active coping with illness (FKVactive) and oversensitivity to sound (hyper-NRS). Values for all tinnitus measures dropped in the group with low PHQ9 scores at T1 with all reductions reaching statistical significance, while there was no significant decrease for these factors in the group with high depression levels. Also, scores of all predictor variables dropped significantly in the former while any reduction observed in the latter group did not reach statistical significance between assessments. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
Response to question whether tinnitus had changed since onset.
| Change since onset | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | ||
| Perceived Loudness | None | 28 (68.3%) | 17 (41.5%) | 20 (48.8%) | 20 (48.8%) |
| More | 7 (17.1%) | 3 (7.3%) | 3 (7.3%) | 3 (7.3%) | |
| Less | 4 (9.8%) | 19 (46.3%) | 18 (43.9%) | 18 (43.9%) | |
| No statement | 2 (4.9%) | 2 (4.9%) | – | – | |
| Perceived distress | None | 19 (46.3%) | 15 (36.6%) | 23 (56.1%) | 20 (48.8%) |
| More | 11 (26.8%) | 4 (9.8%) | 4 (9.8%) | 6 (14.6%) | |
| Less | 3 (7.3%) | 19 (46.3%) | 11 (26.8%) | 15 (36.6%) | |
| No statement | 8 (19.5%) | 3 (7.3%) | 3 (7.3%) | – | |
| Change in hearing if tinnitus onset was associated with hearing impairment | None | 21 (51.2%) | 12 (29.3%) | 10 (24.4%) | |
| Better | 7 (17.1%) | 4 (9.8%) | 2 (4.9%) | ||
| Worse | 2 (4.9%) | – | 1 (2.4%) | ||
| No statement | 11 (26.8%) | 25 (61%) | 28 (68.3%) | ||
Pearson correlation coefficients (r) for bivariate correlations between predictor variables at T1 and outcome variables at T4 are shown together with p-values.
| Predictors | Outcomes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T4-T-NRS | T4-SDS1 | T4-SDS2 | T4-SDS3 | T4-Mini-TQ12 | |
| 0.252 | |||||
| 0.112 | |||||
| 0.051 | 0.047 | −0.18 | 0.044 | 0.221 | |
| 0.757 | 0.787 | 0.913 | 0.786 | 0.170 | |
| 0.306 | 0.231 | ||||
| 0.055 | 0.152 | ||||
| 0.104 | 0.177 | −0.030 | 0.041 | 0.066 | |
| 0.521 | 0.309 | 0.852 | 0.801 | 0.687 | |
| 0.203 | 0.074 | 0.037 | 0.043 | 0.212 | |
| 0.208 | 0.673 | 0.821 | 0.793 | 0.189 | |
As this was an exploratory study, variables with a .
Results of step-wise regression analysis.
| Predictor at T1 | Outcome at T4 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T-NRS | SDS1 | SDS2 | SDS3 | Mini-TQ12 | |
| Explained variance | 50% | 53% | 35% | 49% | 70% |
| 0.497/0.455 | 0.527/0.509 | 0.354/0.337 | 0.485/0.457 | 0.695/0.678 | |
| 11.841 | 30.026 | 20.819 | 21.483 | 42.111 | |
| Stand. betain | 0.444 | 0.726 | 0.595 | 0.540 | 0.734 |
| 0.001** | <0.001** | <0.001** | <0.001** | <0.001** | |
| Stand. betain | 0.283 | 0.218 | |||
| 0.024* | 0.030* | ||||
| Stand. betain | 0.376 | 0.350 | |||
| 0.003** | 0.007** | ||||
Stepwise linear regression analysis was performed separately for each of the outcome variables. Variables included in the analysis were those with sufficient bivariate correlations of r > 0.300 and a p < 0.05 with the respective outcome in the bivariate analyses as shown in Table .