Tinnitus Desensitization Treatment Shows Promising Clinical Data
By Andrea M. Sattinger

An FDA-cleared, noninvasive treatment approach that utilizes neural stimulation to desensitize patients to the disturbing impact of tinnitus has achieved consistently positive results in a controlled clinical study in Australia. "In setting up this study we sought to set a much higher hurdle for a clinical success than others have done in the past," said Peter J. Hanley, PhD, CEO of the Australian entity Neuromonics.

Two prior clinical trials for this approach have been conducted in the last decade. "What was pleasing in the third trial was to see an even quicker benefit and even more significant outcomes," said Dr. Hanley. "We set our benchmark for success at an improvement of at least 40 percent in tinnitus disturbance, and over 90 percent of the patients met or exceeded that hurdle after 6 months."1

The device and treatment, called the Neuromonics Tinnitus Treatment, combines the novel use of acoustic stimulation with a structured program of counseling. The distinctive acoustic component provides stimulation to auditory pathways deprived by hearing loss, engages positively with the limbic system, and allows intermittent, momentary tinnitus perception within a pleasant and relaxing listening experience, thereby facilitating desensitization to the tinnitus signal. By gradually breaking down the patient’s ability to detect the tinnitus, the amount of sound needed to cover up the tinnitus lessens over time. Patients become progressively less aware of and less disturbed by their tinnitus.

In the clinical trial, 35 subjects with predominantly moderate-to-severe tinnitus related distress were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups, corresponding to two stage-based variations of the treatment. In the first group, subjects were exposed to intermittent tinnitus perception throughout the six-month treatment program; in the second group, subjects’ tinnitus perception was completely covered up for the first two months and then only intermittently covered for the remaining four months of treatment.

After initial assessment and instructions, participants were given a personal sound player with earphones and an acoustic stimulus that was customized for their individual audiometric profile. Patients were instructed to use the instrument for at least two hours per day. At two, four, six, and 12 months after beginning treatment, both groups displayed clinically and statistically significant improvements in tinnitus disturbance, awareness, and minimum masking levels, as well as loudness discomfort levels. The Tinnitus Reaction Questionnaire (TRQ), comprised of 26 questions regarding the impact of tinnitus on the subject’s quality of life, was the primary measurement tool used in the trial (Figure 1).

"In our study there was a quite a significant early benefit from the treatment, which happened in the first couple of months," said Dr. Hanley. "Other treatment modalities that have been available for some time, which are heavily counseling-intensive, set the expectation of a year and a half to two years before the patient experiences significant benefit."

There were good rates of acceptability, convenience, and ease of use for the patients. "More than 95 percent rated those questions positively in our treatment review survey," Dr. Hanley said. "That has a major bearing on the relationship between the clinician and the patient." He added that this is also a time-efficient treatment that can be viably integrated into a physician’s practice (Figure 2).

Clinical outcomes were found to be related to the level of usage of the acoustic stimulus. "One of the most striking results in the third trial was the dosage effect that we found," said Dr. Hanley. "There was a strong relationship between the hours of usage per day—that is, the amount of the therapeutic agent that the patients receive— and the speed and consistency with which the benefits were reported."

Furthermore, in the version of the technology that is being employed since the time of the third trial, a dosage meter can now be used to record patients’ usage."We are seeing highly compliant usage, and that’s another big point of distinction compared with [other] treatment options," he said.

Neuromonics in Practice
Jack A. Shohet, MD, otologist-neurotologist in the solo practice of Shohet Ear Associates in Newport Beach, CA, has been using the treatment with a number of his patients for the last year. His patients have had a variety of responses but they are mostly favorable. "There are some patients who feel an instant relief the minute they put the device on their ears," he said, "but that’s certainly the exception rather than the rule. Others experience that their tinnitus awareness and disturbance are slowly improving. And some patients don’t realize the improvement until we point out how they were at the very beginning of the treatment plan."

Dr. Shohet appreciates the approach’s well-defined treatment protocol that gives the patient control. "We have a limited armamentarium for the treatment for tinnitus," he said. "Many of these patients are looking for something they can do, and for a lot of them, having the feeling that they are doing something for their disease process, in and of itself is a benefit." Dr. Shohet emphasizes that the first step in treating tinnitus is identifying the origin of the tinnitus and treating any medically or surgically treatable cause. After that, patients need to address lifestyle issues that affect their tinnitus. "I call them the avoidance factors: avoid stress, fatigue, caffeine, and other loud noises," he said. "And for anyone who has a hearing loss, we get them into a hearing instrument. If all those things fail,we typically will go to our Neuromonics [approach], and in our practice that is a pretty significant proportion [of patients]." Because of the fluctuating nature and intensity of their tinnitus, patients with Ménière’s disease and cochlear hydrops are not ordinarily good candidates for this treatment, although some inpatients in a nonacute phase of their symptomology have experienced some success. Other patients who would be considered poor candidates for the treatment are those who would have trouble self-administering it.

"Any new treatment for tinnitus deserves some healthy skepticism," said Dr. Shohet. "There have been a lot of things that have come up in the past that have been touted as the next greatest thing for tinnitus and in the end it hasn’t turned out to be much better than a placebo," he said. "It is possible that with further studies we may find this instrument’s place in our armamentarium, but so far our early experience has been favorable."

Jack J. Wazen,MD, Director of Research at the Silverstein Institute in Sarasota,FL, helped lead the planning phase for the US trial, which is slated to enroll approximately 100 patients. Dr. Wazen, the first research fellow at the Silverstein Institute and now a partner in that practice, left Sarasota in 1983 and worked as a researcher, professor, and practitioner with Columbia University Presbyterian Medical Center in New York. "Because of my academic background and interest in research, Neuromonics approached me and asked if I wanted to participate in coordinating a national research protocol," he said. Approval of that protocol is imminent.

Because tinnitus is not one disorder, different people may react differently to various treatments. "One of the fallacies is that there is going to be a cure for tinnitus," said Dr. Wazen. "There may be a cure for a certain type of tinnitus that may not work for others. The advantage of the Neuromonics device is that it works on what all types of tinnitus have in common: the brain."

Because the treatment works to dissociate the sound the patient hears from the rest of emotional consciousness, he said, "although the patient may still hear the sound, it is not depressing, it is not aggravating, it is not causing anxiety."

To Dr. Wazen, the principle of the Neuromonics treatment is attractive because dissociating the tinnitus from the rest of the patient’s brain activity would mean that patients can continue thinking, working, and enjoying their lives while their tinnitus is in their subconscious. "That’s a big step in the right direction," he said (Figure 3). Being cautious about what to tell patients is important to symptom management. "What I tell my colleagues and particularly my patients is, ‘Although you may have heard and read that there is no cure for tinnitus, you should not assume every tinnitus is from the same reason.’" Dr. Wazen said. "I want to make sure this tinnitus is not due to a tumor, like an acoustic neuroma, or other treatable conditions," he continued. Until a more definitive procedure or treatment is discovered, he added, "we can now still tell our patients, ‘We have different treatment protocols you can consider—medications and instruments—which could reduce the impact of tinnitus and have you live with it in a better state of mind.’ "Although so-called answers for treating tinnitus have come and gone, this is something that does make sense," said Dr. Wazen. He is hopeful that his investigative team will be able to duplicate the good results of the Australian studies. "Then patients become advocates for this technology," he said, "and the patient would be the best example to other patients."

Reference
1. Davis PB, Paki B, Hanley PJ. Neuromonics Tinnitus Treatment: third clinical trial. Ear Hear 2007; 28 (2):242–59.

Comment by Dr. Sims:

"The theories behind the Neuromonics treatment approach make sense. In practice, we have had positive results with this treatment. I am excited to have the Neuromonics treatment approach available as an option to treat tinnitus."

Employment Rights of People with Communication Disabilities Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA, PL 101-336) provides important protections and opportunities for people with disabilities, including hearing, speech, and language disabilities. This law applies to employers with fifteen (15) or more employees. Protection applies to state and local governments, private employers, employment agencies, and labor unions. Discrimination against qualified people with disabilities in federal employment and in private businesses contracting with the federal government was already prohibited by sections 501 and 503, respectively, of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act (PL 93-112).

What the ADA does

• The ADA prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in all employment practices including job application procedures, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, and training. In addition, the ADA protects other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment such as recruitment, advertising, tenure, layoff, leave, and fringe benefits.
• The ADA requires that employers make reasonable accommodation . A reasonable accommodation can be any modification or adjustment to a job or work environment that will enable an employee with a disability to perform essential job functions. Essential job functions involve those duties and assignments that an employee is actually required to perform, where its omission would fundamentally change the job and where no other employee can provide this function. Reasonable accommodations may include use of a text telephone (TTY), amplified telephone, notetaker, augmentative or alternative communication device, or the services of a sign language interpreter. Restructuring a job (redistributing marginal functions of jobs), modifying work schedules, providing flexible leave policies, and adapting training materials are other means of reasonable accommodation. Accommodations also may be necessary for the employee to enjoy other employee activities and benefits, for example, holding office parties in an accessible location. The employer must also make reasonable accommodation for job applicants during the interview process.
• ADA protects the employee/applicant from expenses associated with providing a reasonable accommodation. For example, the use of the services of a sign language interpreter cannot be billed to the employee. Nor can the employee’s salary be reduced to cover these costs.
• The ADA prohibits employers from asking questions about the nature or severity of the person’s disability on the application form or during the interview. The employer can ask applicants how they would perform certain tasks (with or without an accommodation). A medical evaluation may also be required as part of a conditional job offer but only if all job applicants are asked to do so. Questions regarding how attendance might be affected by a disability may not be asked. However, an employer may provide information on regular work hours, leave policies, and special attendance needs, and ask if the applicant can meet these requirements.

What the ADA does not do

• The ADA does not obligate an employer to provide a reasonable accommodation that will result in undue hardship (requiring significant difficulty; disruption to work schedules, environment, etc; and/or expense) or will fundamentally alter the business. *
• The ADA does not require the employer to provide a personally prescribed device such as a hearing aid or eyeglasses. However, providing such a device may be the most cost-effective accommodation in some cases. *
• The ADA does not obligate the employer to hire a job applicant whose communication disability poses a direct threat to the health or safety of that person or others. For example, if an individual with a hearing loss is unable to hear an essential alarm/alert device and no accommodation is appropriate, the employer is not obligated to hire this job applicant.

If you think that you have been discriminated against in employment on the basis of your communication disability or if you want further information about ADA requirements affecting employment, contact:

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
1801 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20507
(800) 669-3362 (voice) (800) 800-3302 (TT)

Source: This important information was obtained from Medline Plus (a service of the U.S. NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE and the NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH) through the following link to the AMERICAN SPEECH-LANGUAGE HEARING ASSOCIATION’S

web site: http://www.asha.org/public/outreach/take-action/Employment+Rights.htm

Further information can be obtained from the ADA Homepage: http://www.ada.gov/

The following study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Audiology identifies a link between cigarette smoking and permanent hearing loss. The health of the inner ear organ of hearing, the cochlea, depends on an adequate supply of oxygenated blood. Smoking, long known to cause vascular insufficiency, appears to minimize the flow of blood to the cochlea. In addition, hypoxia can occur when carbon monoxide in the blood of smokers prevents the cochlea from getting enough oxygen.

Negley C., Katbamna B., Crumpton T., Lawson G., (2007). Effects of cigarette smoking on distortion product Otoacoustic emissions. J Am Acad Audiol 18: 665-674.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved labeling changes for erectile dysfunction (ED) drugs in the class that includes Cialis, Levitra, and Viagra, to display more prominently the potential risk of sudden hearing loss, and to guide consumers on what to do if they experience sudden problems with their hearing.

In addition, the FDA plans to require the same changes in labeling for the drug Revatio, also a member of this drug class known as phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors. Revatio is used to treat pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). PAH is a serious medical condition in which continuous high blood pressure in arteries of the lungs weakens the heart muscle and often leads to right heart failure and death.

The FDA asked manufacturers of these drugs to revise product labeling after a very small number of patients taking the PDE5 inhibitors reported sudden hearing loss, sometimes accompanied by ringing in the ears and dizziness. “

Because some level of hearing loss is usually associated with the aging process, patients on these drugs may not think to talk to their doctor about it,” said Janet Woodcock, M.D., FDA’s deputy commissioner for scientific and medical programs, chief medical officer, and acting director of its Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

Patients taking Cialis, Levitra, or Viagra who experience sudden hearing loss should immediately stop taking the drug and seek prompt medical attention. Those using Revatio should continue taking their medication but should contact their health care provider for further evaluation. Because Revatio is used to treat a potentially life-threatening condition, the FDA does not recommend patients abruptly stop taking this medication but should consult their physician if they experience sudden problems with their hearing.

A case report in the April 2007 issue of the Journal of Laryngology & Otology involving sudden hearing loss in a man taking Viagra prompted the FDA to search the FDA’s Adverse Events Reporting System for instances of hearing loss and PDE5 inhibitors. The FDA found a total of 29 postmarketing reports of sudden hearing loss, both with and without accompanying ringing in the ears, vertigo, or dizziness. In most of the cases, the hearing loss involved one ear. The hearing loss was either a partial or complete loss of usual hearing. In approximately one third of cases, the event was temporary. In the remainder, the hearing loss was ongoing at the time of the report or the final outcome was not described.

Although no causal relationship has been demonstrated, the strong relationship between the use of these drugs and sudden hearing loss in these cases warrants revisions to the product labeling for this drug class.

Product Web sites, marketing and educational materials, and advertisements for PDE5 inhibitors will reflect the revised product labeling. The label revisions can be viewed at: www.fda.gov/cder/drug/DrugSafety/DrugIndex.htm.

For more information:

http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/ed_drugs/QA.htm

Johns Hopkins Medicine
Media Relations and Public Affairs
October 31, 2007

Brain scientists at Johns Hopkins have discovered how cells in the developing ear make their own noise, long before the ear is able to detect sound around them. The finding, reported in this week’s Nature, helps to explain how the developing auditory system generates brain activity in the absence of sound. It also may explain why people sometimes experience tinnitus and hear sounds that seem to come from nowhere.

The research team made their discovery while studying the properties of non-nerve cells in the ears of young rats. These so-called support cells were thought to be silent bystanders not directly involved in nerve communication. However, to the researchers’ surprise, these cells showed robust electrical activity, similar to nerve cells. Further, this activity occurred spontaneously, without sound or any external stimulus.

“It’s long been thought that nerve cells that connect auditory organs to the brain need to experience sound or other nerve activity to find their way to the part of the brain responsible for processing sound,” says the study’s lead author, Dwight Bergles, Ph.D., an associate professor of neuroscience at Hopkins. “So when we saw that these supporting cells could generate their own electrical activity, we suspected they might somehow be involved in triggering the activity required for proper nerve wiring.”

To figure out how these cells were generating electrical pulses, Bergles’ team suspected that a chemical might be involved; so they applied a number of different candidate drugs and chemicals to the developing cochlea — the small, hollow and liquid-filled chamber in the inner ear that converts sound waves to electrical signals — hoping to block the mystery trigger. The few drugs that altered the electrical output all disabled ATP (adenosine triphosphate), a chemical most often used as a cell’s energy currency but also, as in this case, as a signal to communicate with other cells.

According to Bergles, a breakthrough came when it was discovered that ATP also caused the supporting cells to change their shape. By simply videotaping the developing cochlea, the team was able to monitor where and when ATP was released. After studying these movies, they found that ATP was being released near hair cells, the cells that are responsible for transferring sound information to auditory nerves. It was known that hair cells have receptors for ATP, so they might also be affected by the ATP released from the supporting cells. Indeed, the team found that hair cells also showed spontaneous electrical activity, which occurred at the same time as the responses in neighboring support cells and was blocked by drugs that block ATP receptors.

In a domino-like effect, ATP then signals the hair cells to release another chemical, glutamate, which then activates the nerve cells that project into the brain. “It is as if ATP substitutes for sound when the ear is still immature and physically incapable of detecting sound,” says Bergles, adding that “the cells we have been studying seem to be warming up the machinery that will later be used to transmit sound signals to the brain.”

“We think that only a few cells release ATP at one time,” says Bergles. “And that small amount of free-floating ATP then activates only a few nearby hair cells.” This may help associated nerve cells, far away in the depths of the brain, figure out who and where their neighbors are.
Bergles acknowledges that his experiments beg the question of why a human or any animal would need to “hear” before birth. He speculates that the ability to hear subtle differences, like the inflection in one’s voice, “requires a lot of fine-tuning based on where in the brain the nerves connect. It could be that brief bursts of electrical activity in just a few nerve cells at a time help do that fine-tuning so the system works well.”

While this activity likely is essential for the auditory system’s proper development, it could be bad in the adult, mature nervous system as it would trigger electrical signals in the absence of sound. However, as the ear matures during the first two weeks of a rat’s life, most of the cells that release ATP disappear so that by the time the rat can hear sound, all the spontaneous electrical activity in its ears has stopped.

Although there is no ATP floating around at that point, the hair cells continue to be able to respond to it, and injury to the cochlea can trigger the release of ATP. Bergles suspects that “if ATP were released by the remaining support cells, it may cause the sensation of sound when there is none,” a condition known as tinnitus or ringing in the ears. Alternatively, he notes that bursts of activity might trigger changes in the connectivity of neurons in the brain, just like it does during development, eventually leading to abnormal activity that is perceived as sound.

The research was funded by the National Institutes of Health.

Source: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_releases/2007/10_31_07.html

Comment by Dr. Sims :

Dr. Bergles and his team appear to have discovered an important tinnitus clue. Further research is needed to determine if hair cell injuries like excessive noise exposure and ototoxic medications can cause the release of ATP, triggering the neurological changes that lead to tinnitus.

Released on November 15, 2007

Waltham, MA–A new Brandeis University study of twins shows that genes play a significant role in the level of hearing loss that often appears in late middle age. The research, in the Journal of Gerontology: Medical Sciences, examined genetic and environmental factors affecting hearing loss in the frequency range of speech recognition.

“This research confirms the importance of genetic factors in age-associated hearing loss, and the need for vulnerable individuals and their families to take extra care to prevent further hearing damage,” said lead author Brandeis neuroscientist Arthur Wingfield.

The research suggests that middle-aged and older people with a genetic vulnerability to hearing loss should be particularly careful about environmental risk factors such as harmful noise and medications whose side-effects could be detrimental to hearing.

The study examined 179 identical and 150 fraternal male twin pairs, ranging in age from 52 to 60 years, as part of the Viet Nam Era Twin Study of Aging (VETSA). About two-thirds of the hearing loss in the individual subjects’ better ears could be accounted for by genetic factors. In the subjects’ poorer ears, about one-half of the hearing loss was due to genes, the study concluded.

Wingfield, an expert on the relationship between memory performance and hearing loss in older adults, said that even mild hearing loss can indirectly lead to declines in cognitive performance because intellectual energy normally reserved for higher-level comprehension must be directed toward perceptual effort for accurately hearing speech.

Hearing loss is the third most common chronic disability among older adults after arthritis and hypertension.

Taken from: http://my.brandeis.edu/news/item?news%5fitem%5fid=11976&show%5frelease%5fdate=1

The wireless industry is committed to providing a selection of compatible phones for those customers with a hearing impairment. These ratings have been developed to assist hearing aid device users in finding phones that may be compatible with their particular hearing aid device. From this page you can access a series of questions and answers related to hearing aids and wireless phone interactions; obtain a list of wireless phones that may offer T-coil coupling and/or may have potentially lower levels of interference; obtain a list of useful accessory options.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has passed a set of rules designed to make mobile phones more accessible to persons with disabilities. The FCC created a rating system to help consumers with hearing disabilities find a phone that will work with their hearing aids. Wireless phones rated "M3" or "M4" meet the FCC requirements for hearing aid compatibility and are likely to generate less interference with hearing aid devices. "M" refers to using the phone with a hearing aid in the microphone setting. The higher the "M" rating, the more likely it is you will be able to use the phone with your hearing aid on the microphone setting. Thus, M4 is the "better" or higher of the two ratings. "M" refers to using the phone with a hearing aid in the microphone setting. The higher the "M" rating, the more likely it is you will be able to use the phone with your hearing aid on the microphone setting.

What is a "T" Rating? "T" refers to using the hearing aid set on telecoil. The higher the "T" number the more likely you will receive better interoperability performance between your phone and hearing aid on the telecoil setting. Thus the T4 is the ‘better’ or higher of the two ratings. Reduced feedback and reduced background noise are additional benefits of using a hearing aid set on telecoil during phone use. To determine the likelihood of successful cell phone use with your hearing aid, add the "T" rating number of the cell phone to the "T" rating number of your hearing aid.

Hearing Aid Users – Selecting the best phone for you

Because hearing loss is so individual, no hearing aid and wireless phone combination can be guaranteed to work for everyone, however this information can be used to point hearing aid users in the right direction. Consumers should always try a phone to see if it works for them.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q. What does hearing aid compatibility (HAC) mean for wireless devices (e.g., Cell Phones and PDAs)? A. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) defines HAC for wireless devices in terms of two parameters; radio-frequency (RF) emissions and telecoil coupling. Cell phones are tested to see if they comply with the FCC’s definition of hearing aid compatibility.

Q. How will I know if a wireless device is rated for HAC? A. Information about whether a wireless device is rated for HAC can be found in three places:
1) on the display cards next to devices in service provider operated retail stores,
2) on the packages containing wireless devices, and
3) in the product’s manual or packaging insert. The packages and display cards will be labeled with an "M" and/or "T" and a rating number. Only devices that are rated for HAC will be labeled in this way. If you see an "M3", "M4 T4" or "T3" label on the display card or packaging then the device is HAC compliant. If you have questions about the rating of a wireless device, ask the service provider or device manufacturer for more information.

Q. What does an "M3" or "M4" on the label mean? A. "M" refers to the device’s RF emissions level, and means the device is intended for use with hearing aids in microphone mode. The higher the "M" rating number on the device, the more likely you will be able to use the device with your hearing aid on the microphone setting.

Q. What does a "T3" or "T4" on the label mean? A. "T" refers to the device’s telecoil coupling ability, and means the device is intended for use with hearing aids in telecoil mode. The higher the "T" rating number on the device, the more likely you will be able to use the device with your hearing aid on the telecoil setting.

Q. Are there wireless devices I can use with my hearing aid on the telecoil setting? A. Quite possibly. The FCC requires that wireless devices be rated for HAC specifically for hearing aids in telecoil mode. These devices are labeled with ratings of T3 or T4.

Q. Do the HAC ratings guarantee that I will be able to use a cell phone with my hearing aid? A. Wireless devices that are rated for Hearing Aid Compatibility (HAC) should improve usability for hearing aid users. However, because of the highly individualized nature of hearing loss and hearing aids there is no guarantee.

Q. May I try a wireless device before I buy it? A. Yes, it is advisable to try a wireless device with your hearing aid in the store before making a purchase. It’s best to try several devices before buying to find the best match with your hearing aids. Visit a full service carrier store and ask to try devices that have been designated as "hearing aid compatible."

Q. Can I return a phone if it does not work for me after purchase? A. It depends on the return policy. Be sure to understand the return policy, as well as, any early termination fees before signing up for any cell phone or service. Since a cell phone’s RF emissions can change depending on your location, be sure to fully evaluate your listening experience outside the store during the return period.

Q. Who manufactures wireless devices that have been approved as HAC by the FCC? A. All major handset manufacturers are required to offer HAC-compliant devices and may also offer hands-free accessories to improve usability.

Q. Do HAC compliant wireless devices look any different from other devices? A. No. Q. Does the information in this brochure apply to cochlear implants also? A. Cochlear implants are not regulated by the FCC and therefore are not rated. However, devices rated for HAC may make it more likely that a cochlear implant user will be able to use a cell phone with minimal interference either on the M or T setting. The same rule of thumb applies though – try before you buy. Try before you buy. It’s best to try several phones before making your purchase to find the best match with your hearing aid.

Q. Are devices rated for HAC more expensive than devices without hearing aid compatibility? A. No, the range of features and functions of wireless devices will impact the price, but hearing aid compatibility will not. Service provider owned and operated stores will offer a range of devices with varying features and prices.

Q. I already have a wireless device. May I trade it in for a hearing aid compatible device? A. You will need to consult with your service provider.
Q. What if I cannot find a wireless device that works with my hearing aid? A. You can check with your hearing healthcare professional to determine if there is a hearing aid option for you that may work better with wireless devices. Some telecoil users may find that accessories such as neckloops may further assist with their use of wireless devices.

Q. How can I be "hands free" while using my wireless device? A. Many states now require "hands free" driving while using wireless devices. If you use a telecoil, you may be able to use a neckloop. If you use the microphone mode in your hearing aid, you may be able to use the speaker phone function available on some wireless devices. If there is a Bluetooth accessory for your hearing aid, it may be able to work with Bluetooth enabled wireless devices. Remember safety first while driving.

Q. What is a telecoil? A. A telecoil is a small device that is built into some hearing aids for use with the telephone as well as assistive listening devices. To use the telecoil, generally either the hearing aid is switched to the "T" position or a button on the hearing aid is pushed to select the telecoil program. Some newer hearing aids will automatically switch to telecoil mode when using a phone. The telecoil picks up magnetic fields generated by telephones and converts these fields into sound. Telecoils are particularly useful for telephone communication because they permit the volume control of a hearing aid to be turned up without creating feedback or "whistling," and background noise can be reduced especially when using cell phones in noisy places. To determine whether your hearing aid contains a telecoil and how it is activated, ask your hearing health professional.

Q. What does hearing aid compatibility (HAC) mean for hearing aids? A. Using the same measurement standard that wireless devices use to test for HAC, hearing aids can also be tested and rated for compatibility. This standard measures and rates the hearing aid’s immunity to the typical electromagnetic outputs from wireless devices. An M1 or T1 is the poorest immunity rating, and an M4 or T4 is the best immunity rating. Your hearing healthcare professional may assist you in determining if your hearing aid has been rated.

Q. How do I know if my hearing aids will work with a particular cell phone? A. If your hearing aid is rated for HAC like many wireless devices are, then there is a method for prediction: just add the rating of your hearing aid to the rating of the wireless device. A hearing aid rated M2 and a wireless device rated M3 combine to a give an M rating of 5 and would likely provide "normal" use. An M rating combination of 6 would likely provide "excellent performance". The same would be true of T ratings. The higher the combination, the better the user experience is likely to be. Every individual’s hearing loss is unique so ratings do not guarantee performance. Source: http://www.accesswireless.org/hearingaid/

A summer study at Oregon Health & Science University explores dental professionals’ hearing and ear protection habits to document the prevalence of hearing loss.

Read the rest…

Read the rest…