两种自导式耳鸣音调匹配方法的比较。
Comparison between two self-guided tinnitus pitch matching methods.
作者信息
Santacruz Jose L, de Kleine Emile, van Dijk Pim
机构信息
Department of Otorhinolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Graduate School of Medical Sciences (Research School of Behavioral and Cognitive Neurosciences), University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
出版信息
Front Aging Neurosci. 2023 Jan 25;15:1095178. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2023.1095178. eCollection 2023.
INTRODUCTION
Tinnitus pitch matching is a procedure by which the frequency of an external sound is manipulated in such a way that its pitch matches the one of the tinnitus. The correct measure of the tinnitus pitch plays an important role in the effectiveness of any sound-based therapies. To date, this assessment is difficult due to the subjective nature of tinnitus. Some of the existing pitch matching methods present a challenge for both patients and clinicians, and require multiple adjustments of frequency and loudness, which becomes increasingly difficult in case of coexisting hearing loss. In this paper, we present the comparison in terms of reliability between two self-guided pitch matching methods: the method of adjustment (MOA) and the multiple-choice method (MCM).
METHODS
20 participants with chronic tinnitus and hearing loss underwent the two assessments in two different sessions, 1 week apart. Measures of intraclass correlation (ICC) and difference in octaves (OD) within-method and within-session were obtained.
RESULTS
Both methods presented good reliability, and the obtained values of ICC and OD suggested that both methods might measure a different aspect of tinnitus.
DISCUSSION
Our results suggest that a multiple-choice method (MCM) for tinnitus pitch matching is as reliable in a clinical population as more conventional methods.
引言
耳鸣音调匹配是一种通过操控外部声音的频率,使其音调与耳鸣音调相匹配的程序。正确测量耳鸣音调对任何基于声音的治疗效果都起着重要作用。迄今为止,由于耳鸣的主观性,这种评估很困难。一些现有的音调匹配方法对患者和临床医生来说都具有挑战性,并且需要多次调整频率和响度,在存在听力损失的情况下这变得越来越困难。在本文中,我们比较了两种自主引导的音调匹配方法在可靠性方面的差异:调整法(MOA)和多项选择法(MCM)。
方法
20名患有慢性耳鸣和听力损失的参与者在两个不同的时间段接受了这两种评估,间隔1周。获得了组内相关系数(ICC)和方法内及时间段内的倍频程差异(OD)的测量值。
结果
两种方法都具有良好的可靠性,获得的ICC和OD值表明两种方法可能测量了耳鸣的不同方面。
讨论
我们的结果表明,耳鸣音调匹配的多项选择法(MCM)在临床人群中与更传统的方法一样可靠。
相似文献
Front Aging Neurosci. 2023-1-25
J Am Acad Audiol. 2015-2
J Am Acad Audiol. 2016-10
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2004-3
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018-12-1
Ear Hear. 1994-12
J Neurosci Methods. 2015-12-30
本文引用的文献
Bull World Health Organ. 2019-10-1
Front Aging Neurosci. 2019-3-19
Front Psychol. 2017-9-20
J Am Acad Audiol. 2016-10