Suppr超能文献

主观耳鸣的治疗选择:来自欧洲和美国的普通科医生和耳鼻喉科医生样本的自我报告。

Treatment options for subjective tinnitus: self reports from a sample of general practitioners and ENT physicians within Europe and the USA.

机构信息

NIHR National Biomedical Research Unit in Hearing, Nottingham, UK.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2011 Nov 4;11:302. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-302.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Tinnitus affects about 10-15% of the general population and risks for developing tinnitus are rising through increased exposure to leisure noise through listening to personal music players at high volume. The disorder has a considerable heterogeneity and so no single mechanism is likely to explain the presence of tinnitus in all those affected. As such there is no standardized management pathway nor singly effective treatment for the condition. Choice of clinical intervention is a multi-factorial decision based on many factors, including assessment of patient needs and the healthcare context. The present research surveyed clinicians working in six Westernized countries with the aims: a) to establish the range of referral pathways, b) to evaluate the typical treatment options for categories of subjective tinnitus defined as acute or chronic, and c) to seek clinical opinion about levels of satisfaction with current standards of practice.

METHODS

A structured online questionnaire was conducted with 712 physicians who reported seeing at least one tinnitus patients in the previous three months. They were 370 general practitioners (GPs) and 365 ear-nose-throat specialists (ENTs) from the US, Germany, UK, France, Italy and Spain.

RESULTS

Our international comparison of health systems for tinnitus revealed that although the characteristics of tinnitus appeared broadly similar across countries, the patient's experience of clinical services differed widely. GPs and ENTs were always involved in referral and management to some degree, but multi-disciplinary teams engaged either neurology (Germany, Italy and Spain) or audiology (UK and US) professionals. For acute subjective tinnitus, pharmacological prescriptions were common, while audiological and psychological approaches were more typical for chronic subjective tinnitus; with several specific treatment options being highly country specific. All therapy options were associated with low levels of satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a large variety of treatment options, the low success rates of tinnitus therapy lead to frustration of physicians and patients alike. For subjective tinnitus in particular, effective therapeutic options with guidelines about key diagnostic criteria are urgently needed.

摘要

背景

耳鸣影响约 10-15%的普通人群,由于通过使用个人音乐播放器在高音量下听休闲音乐而增加了对休闲噪声的暴露,因此患耳鸣的风险正在上升。该疾病具有相当大的异质性,因此不可能有一种单一的机制来解释所有受影响者的耳鸣存在。因此,该疾病没有标准化的管理途径,也没有单一有效的治疗方法。临床干预的选择是基于许多因素的多因素决策,包括评估患者的需求和医疗保健环境。本研究调查了在六个西化国家工作的临床医生,目的是:a)确定转诊途径的范围,b)评估急性或慢性主观性耳鸣分类的典型治疗选择,c)寻求对当前实践标准的满意度的临床意见。

方法

对过去三个月至少看过一名耳鸣患者的 712 名医生进行了结构化在线问卷调查。他们是来自美国、德国、英国、法国、意大利和西班牙的 370 名全科医生(GP)和 365 名耳鼻喉科专家(ENT)。

结果

我们对耳鸣保健系统的国际比较表明,尽管各国的耳鸣特征似乎大致相似,但患者对临床服务的体验却大不相同。GP 和 ENT 或多或少地参与转诊和管理,但多学科团队会涉及神经病学(德国、意大利和西班牙)或听力学(英国和美国)专业人员。对于急性主观性耳鸣,药物处方很常见,而对于慢性主观性耳鸣,则更典型的是听力学和心理学方法;有几种特定的治疗方法具有高度的国家特异性。所有的治疗选择都与低满意度相关。

结论

尽管有多种治疗选择,但耳鸣治疗的成功率低导致医生和患者都感到沮丧。特别是对于主观性耳鸣,急需具有关键诊断标准指南的有效治疗选择。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d1f3/3227628/1803dfe962e2/1472-6963-11-302-1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验