耳鸣结果评估。

Trends in Amplification Pub Date : 2008-09-01 Epub Date: 2008-07-03 DOI:10.1177/1084713808319943
Mary B Meikle, Barbara J Stewart, Susan E Griest, James A Henry
{"title":"耳鸣结果评估。","authors":"Mary B Meikle,&nbsp;Barbara J Stewart,&nbsp;Susan E Griest,&nbsp;James A Henry","doi":"10.1177/1084713808319943","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Over the past two decades, recognition has grown that measures for evaluating treatment outcomes must be designed specifically to have high responsiveness. With that in mind, four major types of tinnitus measures are reviewed, including psychoacoustic measures, self-report questionnaires concerning functional effects of tinnitus, various rating scales, and global outcome measures. Nine commonly used tinnitus questionnaires, developed in the period 1980-2000, are reviewed. Because of many similarities between tinnitus and pain, comparisons between pain and tinnitus measures are discussed, and recommendations that have been made for developing a core set of measures to evaluate treatment-related changes in pain are presented as providing a fruitful path for developing a core set of measures for tinnitus. Finally, the importance of having both immediately obtainable outcome measures (psychoacoustic, rating scales, or single global measures) and longer term measures (questionnaires covering the negative effects of tinnitus) is emphasized for further work in tinnitus outcomes assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":48972,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Amplification","volume":"12 3","pages":"223-35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1084713808319943","citationCount":"94","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tinnitus outcomes assessment.\",\"authors\":\"Mary B Meikle,&nbsp;Barbara J Stewart,&nbsp;Susan E Griest,&nbsp;James A Henry\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1084713808319943\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Over the past two decades, recognition has grown that measures for evaluating treatment outcomes must be designed specifically to have high responsiveness. With that in mind, four major types of tinnitus measures are reviewed, including psychoacoustic measures, self-report questionnaires concerning functional effects of tinnitus, various rating scales, and global outcome measures. Nine commonly used tinnitus questionnaires, developed in the period 1980-2000, are reviewed. Because of many similarities between tinnitus and pain, comparisons between pain and tinnitus measures are discussed, and recommendations that have been made for developing a core set of measures to evaluate treatment-related changes in pain are presented as providing a fruitful path for developing a core set of measures for tinnitus. Finally, the importance of having both immediately obtainable outcome measures (psychoacoustic, rating scales, or single global measures) and longer term measures (questionnaires covering the negative effects of tinnitus) is emphasized for further work in tinnitus outcomes assessment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48972,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trends in Amplification\",\"volume\":\"12 3\",\"pages\":\"223-35\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1084713808319943\",\"citationCount\":\"94\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trends in Amplification\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1084713808319943\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2008/7/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Amplification","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1084713808319943","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2008/7/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 94

摘要

在过去的二十年中,人们越来越认识到,评估治疗结果的措施必须专门设计以具有高响应性。鉴于此,本文综述了四种主要的耳鸣测量方法,包括心理声学测量、关于耳鸣功能影响的自我报告问卷、各种评定量表和总体结果测量。回顾了1980年至2000年期间开发的九种常用耳鸣问卷。由于耳鸣和疼痛之间有许多相似之处,因此讨论了疼痛和耳鸣措施之间的比较,并提出了开发一套核心措施来评估治疗相关疼痛变化的建议,为开发一套耳鸣核心措施提供了富有成效的途径。最后,对于耳鸣结果评估的进一步工作,强调了立即获得的结果测量(心理声学,评分量表或单一整体测量)和长期测量(涵盖耳鸣负面影响的问卷)的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tinnitus outcomes assessment.

Over the past two decades, recognition has grown that measures for evaluating treatment outcomes must be designed specifically to have high responsiveness. With that in mind, four major types of tinnitus measures are reviewed, including psychoacoustic measures, self-report questionnaires concerning functional effects of tinnitus, various rating scales, and global outcome measures. Nine commonly used tinnitus questionnaires, developed in the period 1980-2000, are reviewed. Because of many similarities between tinnitus and pain, comparisons between pain and tinnitus measures are discussed, and recommendations that have been made for developing a core set of measures to evaluate treatment-related changes in pain are presented as providing a fruitful path for developing a core set of measures for tinnitus. Finally, the importance of having both immediately obtainable outcome measures (psychoacoustic, rating scales, or single global measures) and longer term measures (questionnaires covering the negative effects of tinnitus) is emphasized for further work in tinnitus outcomes assessment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Trends in Amplification
Trends in Amplification AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信