Background: Tinnitus is a bothersome condition associated with various mechanisms of action. Although treatment methods vary according to these mechanisms, standardized guidelines would benefit both patients and clinicians. We conducted a Delphi study, a method that collects expert opinions through multiple rounds of questionnaires, to reach a consensus on tinnitus treatment with professional experts. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi survey was conducted to develop a clinical consensus on tinnitus treatment. The experts scored each statement on a scale of 1 (highest disagreement) to 9 (highest agreement) for their level of agreement on tinnitus treatment.Consensus was defined when 75% or more of the participants scored 7–9, and 15% or less scored 1–3. To ensure reliability of the responses, the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance were evaluated. Results: Approximately 19 of 31 statements reached a consensus. All 3 statements reached a consensus regarding the candidates for treatment. Regarding treatment, 3 of 8 statements on medication, 2 of 2 statements on tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and 5 of 7 statements on auditory rehabilitation reached a positive consensus. Although all 6 statements regarding miscellaneous treatment reached a consensus, most were negatively agreed. For treatment with neuromodulation, none of the 5 statements reached a consensus. Conclusion The experts reached a high level of consensus on treatment candidates, tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and auditory rehabilitation in this modified Delphi study. The results of this study can provide beneficial and practical information for clinicians regarding the treatment of tinnitus.

Background: Tinnitus is a bothersome condition associated with various mechanisms of action. Although treatment methods vary according to these mechanisms, standardized guidelines would benefit both patients and clinicians. We conducted a Delphi study, a method that collects expert opinions through multiple rounds of questionnaires, to reach a consensus on tinnitus treatment with professional experts. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi survey was conducted to develop a clinical consensus on tinnitus treatment. The experts scored each statement on a scale of 1 (highest disagreement) to 9 (highest agreement) for their level of agreement on tinnitus treatment.Consensus was defined when 75% or more of the participants scored 7–9, and 15% or less scored 1–3. To ensure reliability of the responses, the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance were evaluated. Results: Approximately 19 of 31 statements reached a consensus. All 3 statements reached a consensus regarding the candidates for treatment. Regarding treatment, 3 of 8 statements on medication, 2 of 2 statements on tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and 5 of 7 statements on auditory rehabilitation reached a positive consensus. Although all 6 statements regarding miscellaneous treatment reached a consensus, most were negatively agreed. For treatment with neuromodulation, none of the 5 statements reached a consensus. Conclusion The experts reached a high level of consensus on treatment candidates, tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and auditory rehabilitation in this modified Delphi study. The results of this study can provide beneficial and practical information for clinicians regarding the treatment of tinnitus.

Background: Tinnitus is a bothersome condition associated with various mechanisms of action. Although treatment methods vary according to these mechanisms, standardized guidelines would benefit both patients and clinicians. We conducted a Delphi study, a method that collects expert opinions through multiple rounds of questionnaires, to reach a consensus on tinnitus treatment with professional experts. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi survey was conducted to develop a clinical consensus on tinnitus treatment. The experts scored each statement on a scale of 1 (highest disagreement) to 9 (highest agreement) for their level of agreement on tinnitus treatment.Consensus was defined when 75% or more of the participants scored 7–9, and 15% or less scored 1–3. To ensure reliability of the responses, the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance were evaluated. Results: Approximately 19 of 31 statements reached a consensus. All 3 statements reached a consensus regarding the candidates for treatment. Regarding treatment, 3 of 8 statements on medication, 2 of 2 statements on tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and 5 of 7 statements on auditory rehabilitation reached a positive consensus. Although all 6 statements regarding miscellaneous treatment reached a consensus, most were negatively agreed. For treatment with neuromodulation, none of the 5 statements reached a consensus. Conclusion The experts reached a high level of consensus on treatment candidates, tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and auditory rehabilitation in this modified Delphi study. The results of this study can provide beneficial and practical information for clinicians regarding the treatment of tinnitus.

Background: Tinnitus is a bothersome condition associated with various mechanisms of action. Although treatment methods vary according to these mechanisms, standardized guidelines would benefit both patients and clinicians. We conducted a Delphi study, a method that collects expert opinions through multiple rounds of questionnaires, to reach a consensus on tinnitus treatment with professional experts. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi survey was conducted to develop a clinical consensus on tinnitus treatment. The experts scored each statement on a scale of 1 (highest disagreement) to 9 (highest agreement) for their level of agreement on tinnitus treatment.Consensus was defined when 75% or more of the participants scored 7–9, and 15% or less scored 1–3. To ensure reliability of the responses, the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance were evaluated. Results: Approximately 19 of 31 statements reached a consensus. All 3 statements reached a consensus regarding the candidates for treatment. Regarding treatment, 3 of 8 statements on medication, 2 of 2 statements on tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and 5 of 7 statements on auditory rehabilitation reached a positive consensus. Although all 6 statements regarding miscellaneous treatment reached a consensus, most were negatively agreed. For treatment with neuromodulation, none of the 5 statements reached a consensus. Conclusion The experts reached a high level of consensus on treatment candidates, tinnitus retraining therapy/cognitive behavioral therapy, and auditory rehabilitation in this modified Delphi study. The results of this study can provide beneficial and practical information for clinicians regarding the treatment of tinnitus.

Background: Tinnitus is a bothersome condition associated with various symptoms. However, the mechanisms of tinnitus are still uncertain, and a standardized assessment of the diagnostic criteria for tinnitus is required. We aimed to reach a consensus on diagnosing tinnitus with professional experts by conducting a Delphi study with systematic review of the literature. Methods: Twenty-six experts in managing tinnitus in Korea were recruited, and a two-round modified Delphi study was performed online. The experts evaluated the level of agreement of potential criteria for tinnitus using a scale of 1–9. After the survey, a consensus meeting was held to establish agreement on the results obtained from the Delphi process. Consensus was defined when over 70% of the participants scored 7–9 (agreement) and fewer than 15% scored 1–3 (disagreement). To analyze the responses of the Delphi survey, the content validity ratio and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance were evaluated. Results: Consensus was reached for 22 of the 38 statements. For the definition of tinnitus, 10 out of 17 statements reached consensus, with three statements achieving complete agreement including; 1) Tinnitus is a conscious perception of an auditory sensation in the absence of a corresponding external stimulus, 2) Tinnitus can affect one’s quality of life, and 3) Tinnitus can be associated with hearing disorders including sensorineural hearing loss, vestibular schwannoma, Meniere’s disease, otosclerosis, and others. For the classification of tinnitus, 11 out of 18 statements reached consensus. The participants highly agreed with statements such as; 1) Vascular origin is expected in pulse-synchronous tinnitus, and 2) Tinnitus can be divided into acute or chronic tinnitus. Among three statements on the diagnostic tests for tinnitus only Statement 3, “There are no reliable biomarkers for sensory or emotional factors of tinnitus.”reached consensus. All participants agreed to perform pure-tone audiometry and tinnitus questionnaires, including the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory and Tinnitus Questionnaire. Conclusion We used a modified Delphi method to establish a consensus-based definition, a classification, and diagnostic tests for tinnitus. The expert panel reached agreement for several statements, with a high level of consensus. This may provide practical information for clinicians in managing tinnitus.

Background: This study investigated whether concomitant facial bone (FB) fractures reduce temporal bone (TB) injuries, such as posttraumatic facial palsy and vertigo, through an impact absorbing effect, so-called “cushion effect,” in severe trauma patients. Methods: A total of 134 patients with a TB fracture were included. They were divided into two groups according to their concomitant facial fractures: group I (no FB fracture) and group II (FB fracture). We compared clinical characteristics, such as brain injury, trauma severity, and complications of TB fracture, between the two groups. Results: In group II, immediate facial palsy was more frequent (11.6% vs. 1.5% in group I), and the Injury Severity Score was higher (19.0 ± 5.9 vs. 16.7 ± 7.3, P = 0.020). Delayed facial palsy (12.3% in group I vs. 4.3% in group II) and posttraumatic vertigo (24.6% vs.7.2%) occurred more often in group I. FB fractures significantly decreased the incidence of posttraumatic vertigo (odds ratio [OR], 0.276; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.083–0.914). Intraventricular hemorrhage (OR, 20.958; 95% CI, 2.075–211.677), facial nerve canal injury (OR, 12.229; 95% CI, 2.465–60.670), and FB fractures (OR, 16.420; 95% CI, 1.298–207.738) increased the risk of immediate facial palsy. Conclusion Concomitant FB fractures reduced the risk of the occurrence of delayed facial palsy and posttraumatic vertigo in injured patients with TB fracture. Particularly, an anterior force may be reduced by the cushion effect of the bony fracture.

Objectives: . When performing middle ear operations, such as ossiculoplasty or stapes surgery, patients and surgeons expect an improvement in air conduction (AC) hearing, but generally not in bone conduction (BC). However, BC improvement has often been observed after surgery, and the present study investigated this phenomenon. Methods: . We reviewed the preoperative and postoperative surgical outcomes of 583 patients who underwent middle ear surgery. BC improvement was defined as a BC threshold decrease of >15 dB at two or more frequencies. Subjects in group A underwent staged ossiculoplasty after canal wall up mastoidectomy (CWUM), group B underwent staged ossiculoplasty after canal wall down mastoidectomy (CWDM), group C underwent ossiculoplasty only (thus, they had no prior history of CWUM or CWDM), and group D received stapes surgery. We created a hypothetical circuit model to explain this phenomenon. Results: . BC improvement was detected in 12.8% of group A, 9.1% of group B, and 8.5% of group C. The improvement was more pronounced in group D (27.0%). A larger gain in AC hearing was weakly correlated with greater BC improvement (Pearson’s r=0.395 in group A, P<0.001; r=0.375 in group B, P<0.001; r=0.296 in group C, P<0.001; r=0.422 in group D, P=0.009). Notably, patients with otosclerosis even experienced postoperative BC improvements as large as 10.0 dB, from a mean value of 30.3 dB (standard error [SE], 3.2) preoperatively to 20.3 dB (SE, 3.2) postoperatively, at 1,000 Hz, as well as an improvement of 9.2 dB at 2,000 Hz, from 37.8 dB (SE, 2.6) to 28.6 dB (SE, 3.1). Conclusion . BC improvement may be explained by a hypothetical circuit model applying the third window theory. Surgeons should keep in mind the possibility of BC improvement when making a management plan.

Objectives: . The aim of this study was to evaluate vestibular function loss after cochlear implantation (CI) and the relationship between vestibular function and hearing changes. Methods: . Seventy-five patients with CI were enrolled and divided into those with normal preoperative caloric function (group I) and those with a normal preoperative waveform in cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential (c-VEMP) testing (group II). The relationship between hearing and changes in the vestibular system was analyzed preoperatively and at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Results: . In group I, unilateral weakness on the implanted side was detected in five (7.7%) and eight (12.3%) patients at 3 and 6 months post-CI, respectively. By 3 months post-CI, the total slow-phase velocity (SPV; warm and cold stimulations) was significantly different between the implanted and non-implanted sides (P=0.011), and the shift in total SPV from pre- to post-CI was significantly correlated with the average hearing threshold at 6 months post-CI. In group II, an abnormal c-VEMP was detected on the implanted side in six patients (16.2%) at 3 months post-CI, and in six patients (16.2%) at 6 months post-CI. Significant changes were noticed in the P1 and N1 amplitude at 3 months postCI (P=0.027 and P=0.019, respectively). Conclusion . Vestibular function and residual hearing function should be afforded equal and simultaneous consideration in terms of preservation.