Oak-Sung Choo, Jung Mee Park, Euyhyun Park, Jiwon Chang, Min Young Lee, Ho Yun Lee, In Seok Moon, Jae-Jun Song, Kyu-Yup Lee, Jae-Jin Song, Eui-Cheol Nam, Shi Nae Park, Hyun Joon Shim, Yoon Chan Rah, Jae-Hyun Seo
{"title":"关于耳鸣评估和治疗结果评估的共识声明:韩国耳鸣研究组的德尔菲研究。","authors":"Oak-Sung Choo, Jung Mee Park, Euyhyun Park, Jiwon Chang, Min Young Lee, Ho Yun Lee, In Seok Moon, Jae-Jun Song, Kyu-Yup Lee, Jae-Jin Song, Eui-Cheol Nam, Shi Nae Park, Hyun Joon Shim, Yoon Chan Rah, Jae-Hyun Seo","doi":"10.3346/jkms.2025.40.e93","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Tinnitus is a multifactorial condition with no universally accepted assessment guidelines. The Korean Tinnitus Study Group previously established consensus statements on the definition, classification, and diagnostic tests for tinnitus. As a continuation of this effort, this study aims to establish expert consensus on tinnitus assessment and treatment outcome evaluation, specifically tailored to the Korean clinical context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A modified Delphi method involving 26 otology experts from across Korea was used. A two-round Delphi survey was conducted to evaluate statements related to tinnitus assessment before and after treatment. Statements were rated on a scale of 1 to 9 for the level of agreement. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement (score of 7-9) and ≤ 15% disagreement (score of 1-3). Statistical measures such as content validity ratio and Kendall's coefficient of concordance (W) were calculated to assess agreement levels.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 46 assessment-related statements, 17 (37%) reached consensus, though overall pre-treatment assessments showed weak agreement (Kendall's W = 0.319). Key areas of agreement included the use of the visual analogue scale, numeric rating scale, and validated questionnaires for pre-treatment evaluation. Five statements, such as the use of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography for diagnosing pulsatile tinnitus, achieved over 90% agreement. For treatment outcome measurements, 8 of 12 statements (67%) reached a consensus, with moderate agreement (Kendall's W = 0.513). Validated questionnaires and psychoacoustic tests were recommended for evaluating treatment effects within 12 weeks. While standardized imaging for pulsatile tinnitus and additional clinical tests were strongly recommended, full consensus was not achieved across all imaging modalities.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study provides actionable recommendations for tinnitus assessment and treatment evaluation, emphasizing the use of standardized tools and individualized approaches based on patient needs. These findings offer a practical framework to enhance consistency and effectiveness in tinnitus management within Korean clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":16249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Korean Medical Science","volume":"40 7","pages":"e93"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11858605/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consensus Statements on Tinnitus Assessment and Treatment Outcome Evaluation: A Delphi Study by the Korean Tinnitus Study Group.\",\"authors\":\"Oak-Sung Choo, Jung Mee Park, Euyhyun Park, Jiwon Chang, Min Young Lee, Ho Yun Lee, In Seok Moon, Jae-Jun Song, Kyu-Yup Lee, Jae-Jin Song, Eui-Cheol Nam, Shi Nae Park, Hyun Joon Shim, Yoon Chan Rah, Jae-Hyun Seo\",\"doi\":\"10.3346/jkms.2025.40.e93\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Tinnitus is a multifactorial condition with no universally accepted assessment guidelines. The Korean Tinnitus Study Group previously established consensus statements on the definition, classification, and diagnostic tests for tinnitus. As a continuation of this effort, this study aims to establish expert consensus on tinnitus assessment and treatment outcome evaluation, specifically tailored to the Korean clinical context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A modified Delphi method involving 26 otology experts from across Korea was used. A two-round Delphi survey was conducted to evaluate statements related to tinnitus assessment before and after treatment. Statements were rated on a scale of 1 to 9 for the level of agreement. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement (score of 7-9) and ≤ 15% disagreement (score of 1-3). Statistical measures such as content validity ratio and Kendall's coefficient of concordance (W) were calculated to assess agreement levels.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 46 assessment-related statements, 17 (37%) reached consensus, though overall pre-treatment assessments showed weak agreement (Kendall's W = 0.319). Key areas of agreement included the use of the visual analogue scale, numeric rating scale, and validated questionnaires for pre-treatment evaluation. Five statements, such as the use of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography for diagnosing pulsatile tinnitus, achieved over 90% agreement. For treatment outcome measurements, 8 of 12 statements (67%) reached a consensus, with moderate agreement (Kendall's W = 0.513). Validated questionnaires and psychoacoustic tests were recommended for evaluating treatment effects within 12 weeks. While standardized imaging for pulsatile tinnitus and additional clinical tests were strongly recommended, full consensus was not achieved across all imaging modalities.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study provides actionable recommendations for tinnitus assessment and treatment evaluation, emphasizing the use of standardized tools and individualized approaches based on patient needs. These findings offer a practical framework to enhance consistency and effectiveness in tinnitus management within Korean clinical settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16249,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Korean Medical Science\",\"volume\":\"40 7\",\"pages\":\"e93\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11858605/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Korean Medical Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2025.40.e93\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Korean Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2025.40.e93","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:耳鸣是一种多因素的疾病,没有普遍接受的评估指南。韩国耳鸣研究小组先前就耳鸣的定义、分类和诊断测试建立了共识声明。作为这一努力的延续,本研究旨在针对韩国临床情况,就耳鸣评估和治疗结果评估建立专家共识。方法:采用改进的德尔菲法对全国26名耳科专家进行调查。通过两轮德尔菲调查来评估治疗前后耳鸣评估的相关陈述。这些陈述的一致程度按1到9分进行评分。共识定义为≥70%的同意(7-9分)和≤15%的不同意(1-3分)。统计测量如内容效度比和肯德尔的一致性系数(W)计算来评估协议水平。结果:在46个评估相关的陈述中,17个(37%)达成共识,尽管总体预处理评估显示弱一致性(Kendall's W = 0.319)。关键的共识领域包括使用视觉模拟量表、数字评定量表和用于预处理评估的有效问卷。使用计算机断层扫描、磁共振成像和血管造影诊断搏动性耳鸣达到90%以上的一致性。对于治疗结果的测量,12个陈述中有8个(67%)达成了共识,具有中等程度的一致性(肯德尔W = 0.513)。建议在12周内进行有效问卷调查和心理声学测试来评估治疗效果。虽然搏动性耳鸣的标准化成像和额外的临床检查被强烈推荐,但没有在所有成像方式上达成完全的共识。结论:本研究为耳鸣评估和治疗评估提供了可操作的建议,强调根据患者需要使用标准化工具和个性化方法。这些发现提供了一个实用的框架,以提高耳鸣管理的一致性和有效性在韩国临床设置。
Consensus Statements on Tinnitus Assessment and Treatment Outcome Evaluation: A Delphi Study by the Korean Tinnitus Study Group.
Background: Tinnitus is a multifactorial condition with no universally accepted assessment guidelines. The Korean Tinnitus Study Group previously established consensus statements on the definition, classification, and diagnostic tests for tinnitus. As a continuation of this effort, this study aims to establish expert consensus on tinnitus assessment and treatment outcome evaluation, specifically tailored to the Korean clinical context.
Methods: A modified Delphi method involving 26 otology experts from across Korea was used. A two-round Delphi survey was conducted to evaluate statements related to tinnitus assessment before and after treatment. Statements were rated on a scale of 1 to 9 for the level of agreement. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement (score of 7-9) and ≤ 15% disagreement (score of 1-3). Statistical measures such as content validity ratio and Kendall's coefficient of concordance (W) were calculated to assess agreement levels.
Results: Of the 46 assessment-related statements, 17 (37%) reached consensus, though overall pre-treatment assessments showed weak agreement (Kendall's W = 0.319). Key areas of agreement included the use of the visual analogue scale, numeric rating scale, and validated questionnaires for pre-treatment evaluation. Five statements, such as the use of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography for diagnosing pulsatile tinnitus, achieved over 90% agreement. For treatment outcome measurements, 8 of 12 statements (67%) reached a consensus, with moderate agreement (Kendall's W = 0.513). Validated questionnaires and psychoacoustic tests were recommended for evaluating treatment effects within 12 weeks. While standardized imaging for pulsatile tinnitus and additional clinical tests were strongly recommended, full consensus was not achieved across all imaging modalities.
Conclusion: This study provides actionable recommendations for tinnitus assessment and treatment evaluation, emphasizing the use of standardized tools and individualized approaches based on patient needs. These findings offer a practical framework to enhance consistency and effectiveness in tinnitus management within Korean clinical settings.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Korean Medical Science (JKMS) is an international, peer-reviewed Open Access journal of medicine published weekly in English. The Journal’s publisher is the Korean Academy of Medical Sciences (KAMS), Korean Medical Association (KMA). JKMS aims to publish evidence-based, scientific research articles from various disciplines of the medical sciences. The Journal welcomes articles of general interest to medical researchers especially when they contain original information. Articles on the clinical evaluation of drugs and other therapies, epidemiologic studies of the general population, studies on pathogenic organisms and toxic materials, and the toxicities and adverse effects of therapeutics are welcome.