Diagnosis of Hyperacusis and Audiological
In the UK,
audiologists who are specialized in tinnitus rehabilitation play a major role
in providing support and therapeutic services to patients who experience
hyperacusis (Aazh et al.
2014; Pienkowski et al. 2014; Tyler et al. 2014). Assessment of hyperacusis usually
involves pure-tone audiometry, the measurement of uncomfortable loudness levels
(ULLs), and self-report questionnaires, typically the Hyperacusis Questionnaire
(HQ) (Khalfa et al.
2004). The pure-tone average (PTA)
threshold across the frequencies 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz provides a measure of the
weakest sounds that can be detected for tones with different frequencies. In
contrast, ULLs provide a measure of the sound level above which tones with
different frequencies become uncomfortably loud. For normal-hearing people
without hyperacusis, the average ULL across the audiometric frequencies is about
100 dB hearing Level (HL) (Sherlock &
ULLs reported for patients with hyperacusis (when diagnosed via measures other
than ULLs, such as questionnaires) vary widely across studies, from 66 dB HL
(standard deviation, SD =15) (Blaesing &
Kroener-Herwig 2012), to 77 dB HL (Anari et al.
1999), and 83 dB HL (SD = 17) (Sheldrake et
al. 2015). This makes the diagnosis of
hyperacusis based on ULLs difficult. The criteria for diagnosing hyperacusis
handicap based on HQ scores are not generally agreed either. Khalfa et al. (2002) suggested a cutoff score of 28 as indicating
hyperacusis handicap. Meeus et al.
(2010) suggested reducing the cutoff score
to 26, while Fackrell et al.
(2015) suggested that the cutoff score of
28 needs to be revaluated but did not propose a definitive value.
Brian C. J. Moore (University of Cambridge, UK) and Hashir Aazh (Royal Surrey
County Hospital, UK) presented their recent research findings with regard to
the diagnosis of hyperacusis. They assessed the criteria for diagnosing
hyperacusis based on measurements of ULLs and scores for the HQ for 573
consecutive patients who attended the Tinnitus and Hyperacusis Therapy
Specialist Clinic (THTSC) (Aazh &
Moore 2017a). Their results showed that a
diagnosis of hyperacusis based on HQ scores can be made consistent with a
diagnosis based on ULLs if the following cutoff scores are adopted for a
positive diagnosis: the average ULL at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4 and 8 kHz for the ear
with the lower average ULL, ULLmin, should be ≤77 dB HL and the HQ score should
be ≥22. With these cutoff values, 95% of patients with HQ scores meeting the criterion
will also meet the criterion based on ULLs, and vice versa. However, the cutoff
values for ULLs and HQ scores proposed by Aazh and Moore
(2017a) lead only to a binary decision;
hyperacusis is either present or absent. Further work needs to be conducted in
developing psychometric instruments to determine the severity of hyperacusis,
its subtypes and its impact on a patient’s life.
Brian Moore and Hashir Aazh also discussed possible problems that can arise
during measurement of audiometric thresholds and ULLs when patients have
unusually low ULLs. In extreme cases of hyperacusis, ULLs can be as low as 10
dB HL (Aazh &
Moore 2018). Such low ULLs raise the
possibility that some patients will experience discomfort during routine
audiometry and measurement of ULLs. The proportion of patients for whom this
might happen was assessed in a recent study by Aazh and Moore (2017b). The study was based on 362 consecutive
patients who attended a National Health Service audiology clinic for tinnitus
and/or hyperacusis rehabilitation. Pure-tone audiometry was conducted using the
procedure recommended by the British Society of Audiology (BSA) (British Society
of Audiology 2011)for frequencies of 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3,
4, 6, and 8 kHz. A similar procedure is used in many countries.
According to this procedure, once the threshold has been determined at a given
frequency, the initial level when assessing the threshold for the next
frequency should be “at a clearly audible level (e.g. 30 dB above the adjacent
threshold” (p. 11), but never more than 80 dB HL. An experience of discomfort during pure-tone audiometry was deemed to
be present when a test tone with a given frequency presented at 30 dB above the
threshold for an adjacent frequency exceeded the ULL at the test frequency for
at least one of the measured frequencies. Remarkably, the results showed that
discomfort would have occurred for 21% of the patients. The incidence of
discomfort would have been reduced to 10%, 2.7%, and 0.8% if the starting level
had been 20 dB above, 10 dB above, or at the same level as the threshold for
the adjacent frequency, respectively.
In the study of Aazh and Moore (2017b), ULLs were also measured using the BSA
recommended procedure (British Society
of Audiology 2011).
According to this, the audiologist should “Start testing at 60 dB HL or at the
subject’s hearing threshold level for that ear at that frequency, whichever is
highest, unless otherwise indicated (Section 2.2)” (p.7). An experience of discomfort during
measurement of ULLs was deemed to be present if the starting level of 60 dB HL
exceeded a patient’s ULL for at least at one of the measured frequencies.
Discomfort would have occurred for 24% of the patients using this criterion.
The incidence of discomfort would have been reduced to 3.6% if the starting
level had been reduced to 30 dB HL and to 0.5% if the starting level had been reduced
to 15 dB HL.
high prevalence of anxiety and stress in patients seeking help for tinnitus and
hyperacusis (Aazh & Moore 2017c), it is very
important to ensure that any evaluation procedures do not lead to unnecessary
discomfort. If discomfort is experienced, this might trigger further anxiety and stress,
leading to worsening of the symptoms and to possible loss of trust in the audiologist.
This in turn might reduce the effectiveness of any therapy performed by the
audiologist after the initial evaluation. To avoid discomfort during PTA, Aazh
and Moore (2017b) suggested using an initial level of 0 dB HL at
the starting frequency of 1 kHz and setting the level for subsequent
frequencies to be equal to the level at threshold for the previously tested
frequency. To avoid discomfort during measurement of ULLs, they recommended
that the starting level for a given test frequency should be equal to the
measured audiometric threshold at that test frequency and that levels above 80
dB HL should not be used.
Aazh, H., McFerran,
D., Salvi, R., et al. (2014). Insights from the First International Conference
on Hyperacusis: causes, evaluation, diagnosis and treatment. Noise Health, 16, 123-6.
Aazh, H., & Moore, B. C. J. (2017a). Factors related to
Uncomfortable Loudness Levels for patients seen in a tinnitus and hyperacusis
clinic. International Journal of
Audiology 56, 793-800.
Aazh, H., & Moore, B. C. J. (2017b). Incidence of discomfort
during pure-tone audiometry and measurement of uncomfortable loudness levels
among People seeking help for tinnitus and/or hyperacusis American
Journal of Audiolgy, 26, 226-232.
Aazh, H., & Moore, B. C. J. (2017c). Usefulness of self-report
questionnaires for psychological assessment of patients with tinnitus and
hyperacusis and patients' views of the questionnaires. International Journal of Audiology, 56, 489-498.
Aazh, H., & Moore, B. C. J. (2018). Prevalence and
characteristics of patients with severe hyperacusis among patients seen in a
tinnitus and hyperacusis clinic Journal of American Academy of Audiology,
Anari, M., Axelsson, A., Eliasson, A., et al. (1999).
Hypersensitivity to sound--questionnaire data, audiometry and classification. Scand Audiol, 28, 219-30.
Blaesing, L., & Kroener-Herwig, B. (2012). Self-reported and
behavioral sound avoidance in tinnitus and hyperacusis subjects, and
association with anxiety ratings. Int J
Audiol, 51, 611-7.
British Society of Audiology (2011). British Society of Audiology Recommended Procedure, Determination of
uncomfortable loudness levels. Reading, UK: British Society of
Fackrell, K., Fearnley, C., Hoare, D. J., et al. (2015). Hyperacusis
Questionnaire as a tool for measuring hypersensitivity to sound in a tinnitus
research population. Biomed Res Int, 2015, 290425.
Khalfa, S., Bruneau, N., Roge, B., et al. (2004). Increased
perception of loudness in autism. Hear
Res, 198, 87-92.
Khalfa, S., Dubal, S., Veuillet, E., et al. (2002). Psychometric
normalization of a hyperacusis questionnaire. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec, 64, 436-42.
Meeus, O. M., Spaepen, M., Ridder, D. D., et al. (2010). Correlation
between hyperacusis measurements in daily ENT practice. Int J Audiol, 49, 7-13.
Pienkowski, M., Tyler, R. S., Roncancio, E. R., et al. (2014). A
review of hyperacusis and future directions: part II. measurement, mechanisms,
and treatment. Am J Audiol, 23, 420-36.
Sheldrake, J., Diehl, P. U., & Schaette, R. (2015). Audiometric
characteristics of hyperacusis patients. Front
Neurol, 6, 105.
Sherlock, L. P., & Formby, C. (2005). Estimates of loudness,
loudness discomfort, and the auditory dynamic range: normative estimates,
comparison of procedures, and test-retest reliability. J Am Acad Audiol, 16,
Tyler, R. S., Pienkowski, M., Rojas Roncancio, E., et al. (2014). A
review of hyperacusis and future directions: part I. definitions and
manifestations. American Journal of
Audiology, 23, 402-419.