**New Alternative Treatments of Tinnitus**

134 Up to Date on Tinnitus

Svačina, Š. (2002). *Obezita a psychofarmaka,* Triton, ISBN: 80-7254-253-2, Prague, Czech

*USA* 

Martin Lenhardt

**Home Medical Device for Tinnitus Treatment** 

Tinnitus is almost exclusively defined as ringing in the ear(s); more common in the popular than the professional literature since the turn of the century. It is now well recognized that tinnitus is chiefly neural, that is a perception being in one or both ears. This is not to deny cochlear tinnitus or the role of the cochlea in the tinnitus process. It is also typical to define tinnitus as a phantom sound with no external stimulus; also suggesting tinnitus arises in the central nervous system. The phantom descriptor is somewhat problematic (Shulman, 1995); however external sound can and does influence the perception of tinnitus and is a common therapeutic treatment in the form of masking. Further, that means the perception of tinnitus is interactive with external ambient sound. If sound levels are dramatically reduced as in echo free space (anechoic) normal hearing young individuals will generally report tinnitus like perceptions without sensations. The first in a series of studies Heller and Bergmann, (1952) reported almost 94% of normal hearing subjects experienced hearing sounds in a sound attenuated chamber (ambient level of 15-18 dB SPL) after just a few minutes. This finding was repeated but to a lesser degree in three studies (Del Bo et al., 2008; Knobel and Sanchez, 2008; Tucker et al., 2005) in which a 64-68 % of the subjects reported tinnitus. Most interestingly, if attention was redirected away from the auditory modality, the percent responding was less than half (45%). If the subjects were engaged in a cognitive task the percent report tinnitus was <20%. It is not surprising that attention or top down processing plays a role in tinnitus with normal hearing individuals since it is a major factor in segregating those who are bothered or not by their tinnitus (Erlandsson et al., 1992). For those that are not

bothered by their tinnitus, the typical response is I do not pay attention to it.

There are no published reports of tinnitus being induced in the almost absolute silence, in human terms, in anechoic space. The room in the Del Bo et al., (2008) study is termed a sound proof chamber and also an anechoic chamber; it may have been anechoic with sound attenuation below minimal audible fields. Anechoic space is valuable component in an assessment of silence induced tinnitus since the sound levels are generally less than the air reference of 0.0002 dynes/cm2. While antidotal in nature, I have a vivid memory of my first experience in an anechoic chamber as a graduate student at Florida State University. I walked out on a wire mesh since there were Fiberglas sound wedges below as above and around me. Once the doors were shut I immediately heard my physiological noise of respiration etc. I spoke and it appeared to me that my words were sucked away from my

**1. Introduction** 

**1.1 A tinnitus definition** 

*Biomedical Engineering, Otolaryngology, Emergency Medicine,* 

*Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond VA,* 

### **Home Medical Device for Tinnitus Treatment**

#### Martin Lenhardt

*Biomedical Engineering, Otolaryngology, Emergency Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond VA, USA* 

#### **1. Introduction**

#### **1.1 A tinnitus definition**

Tinnitus is almost exclusively defined as ringing in the ear(s); more common in the popular than the professional literature since the turn of the century. It is now well recognized that tinnitus is chiefly neural, that is a perception being in one or both ears. This is not to deny cochlear tinnitus or the role of the cochlea in the tinnitus process. It is also typical to define tinnitus as a phantom sound with no external stimulus; also suggesting tinnitus arises in the central nervous system. The phantom descriptor is somewhat problematic (Shulman, 1995); however external sound can and does influence the perception of tinnitus and is a common therapeutic treatment in the form of masking. Further, that means the perception of tinnitus is interactive with external ambient sound. If sound levels are dramatically reduced as in echo free space (anechoic) normal hearing young individuals will generally report tinnitus like perceptions without sensations. The first in a series of studies Heller and Bergmann, (1952) reported almost 94% of normal hearing subjects experienced hearing sounds in a sound attenuated chamber (ambient level of 15-18 dB SPL) after just a few minutes. This finding was repeated but to a lesser degree in three studies (Del Bo et al., 2008; Knobel and Sanchez, 2008; Tucker et al., 2005) in which a 64-68 % of the subjects reported tinnitus. Most interestingly, if attention was redirected away from the auditory modality, the percent responding was less than half (45%). If the subjects were engaged in a cognitive task the percent report tinnitus was <20%. It is not surprising that attention or top down processing plays a role in tinnitus with normal hearing individuals since it is a major factor in segregating those who are bothered or not by their tinnitus (Erlandsson et al., 1992). For those that are not bothered by their tinnitus, the typical response is I do not pay attention to it.

There are no published reports of tinnitus being induced in the almost absolute silence, in human terms, in anechoic space. The room in the Del Bo et al., (2008) study is termed a sound proof chamber and also an anechoic chamber; it may have been anechoic with sound attenuation below minimal audible fields. Anechoic space is valuable component in an assessment of silence induced tinnitus since the sound levels are generally less than the air reference of 0.0002 dynes/cm2. While antidotal in nature, I have a vivid memory of my first experience in an anechoic chamber as a graduate student at Florida State University. I walked out on a wire mesh since there were Fiberglas sound wedges below as above and around me. Once the doors were shut I immediately heard my physiological noise of respiration etc. I spoke and it appeared to me that my words were sucked away from my

Home Medical Device for Tinnitus Treatment 139

Tinnitus can be present in individuals with normal hearing; however normal hearing measurement does not always indicate fully intact hair cells (Bredgerg, 1967) or a spinal ganglia free of deaffrination or even cochlea free of dead regions (Weisz et al., 2006). High frequency audiometery on tinnitus patients revealed 12 of 18 had threshold elevation in the high frequency region (10, 12, 14, 16 kHz) in one study (Shim et al., 2009). Goldstein et al., (2006) reported high hearing loss common in severe disabling tinnitus. Thus tinnitus can exist in individuals even if hearing appears unremarkable in the conventional audiometric range and some hearing loss in the very high frequencies may be more commonly present than previously believed (Goldstein et al., 2005). Further, there may be neuroplastic changes in the brain regions that code these very high frequencies, which may contribute to the tinnitus percept. Very high frequency hearing loss (>10 kHz) might benefit from very high frequency sound therapy (Goldstein et al., 2006) including ultrasonic masking Meikle et al.,

Overwhelmingly, hearing loss is often associated with tinnitus and it appears to be the key factor triggering the events that lead to tinnitus in humans and animals. The most frequent cause of hearing loss is intense noise which is often characterized as a high frequency loss of hearing behaviorally and a loss of hair cells and changes in the nerve and auditory synapses in the brain. Spontaneous firing rates tend to increase in the first auditory brain synapse (dorsal and ventral cochlear nucleus) as well as in the midbrain (inferior colliculus) and auditory cortex (primary and secondary)[Wienbruch et al., 2006; Eggermont and Roberts 2004]. Tinnitus neural induced changes are not limited to the classical pathways but also present in the non-classical or non-lemnsical pathways (Mollar et al., 1992) Both pathway have input into the limbic system (LeDoux, 1990) and it is the involvement of this system that form the final common pathway in tinnitus (Shulman 1995; Shulman and Goldstein

The change in neurons' spontaneous firing rates along the neuraxis is also accompanied by changes in the neural tuning properties of neurons representing the peripheral region of the hearing loss (Schaetta and Kempter, 2009). The neuromechanisms that give rise to neuro hyperactivity have not been identified but some form of increased gain in the central nervous system is likely, which suggests that additional stimulation covering the effect

Norena and Eggermont (2005) reported that cats exposed to a traumatizing noise and immediately placed in a 40 dB high frequency sound environment had much less hearing loss compared with similarly exposed cats placed in a quiet environment. The hearing loss in the quiet reared cats ranged from 6 to 32 kHz with the loss, on average, 40 dB. In contrast, the hearing loss in the high frequency environment cats was restricted to 6-8 kHz at a level near 35 dB. Despite the restricted hearing loss for the high frequency stimulated cats in the 6-8 kHz range, no auditory cortical reprogramming was found, suggesting that the high frequency stimulation prevented the expected reorganization. It would seem then an effective treatment for tinnitus in humans would be very high frequency stimulation at a moderate level covering the tinnitus pitch match and the tinnitus spectrum (Schaette et al.,

Encouraged by the Norena and Eggermont's (2005) study high frequency stimulation was applied with tinnitus patients and matched controls with similar sensorineural hearing loss and no history of tinnitus (Goldstein et al., 2005. The results revealed that high frequency stimulation for 5-8 weeks dramatically reduced the level of sound needed to mask tinnitus

**1.2 Neuroscience of treatment** 

1999; Lenhardt, 2003).

2006; Shulman et al., 2009).

2010)

frequency region might form the basis of sound therapy.

mouth, then, I heard a high frequency hissing seemingly in the middle of my head which I now identify as tinnitus. Upon exiting the chamber all such perceptions ceased. Re-entering the hissing returned as did my sense of bodily noises. The three other graduate students in the lab had the same experience as did other visiting students. We thought this was a common experience not worthy of a formal report. My hearing was at 0 dB HL up to 8 kHz (highest measured) and my minimal audible angle at 2 kHz was < 40. A few years later my high frequency hearing was measured and it too was normal up to 20 kHz. I had no more than a cursory understanding of tinnitus and concluded at the time the critical factor in its appearance was the lowered ambient noise of the chamber. With this experience in mind, I must conclude that tinnitus is naturally induced by silence. I have never experience the same tinnitus perception is single or double walled acoustic enclosures with less attenuation.

Absolute silence can also be achieved with eight nerve section. Tinnitus is generally not eliminated, but can be increased by this procedure (Cope et al, 2011) although the effect was found to vary from increased to decreased tinnitus or no effect (Mollar et al., 1993). Tinnitus can be associated with severe deafness and can generally be ameliorated to degree with the electrical stimulation of a cochlear implant (Amoodi et al., 2011; Arndt et al., 2011; Pan et al., 2009).

What then is the mechanism that produces tinnitus with just being in silence or immediately having an eight nerve sectioning, this cannot be the result of complex neural plastic changes in the brain, it is most likely a release from neural inhibition in the peripheral neural structures, probably acting the spiral ganglia by the central auditory system. This would account for the rapid turn on/off when stepping out of anechoic space and back in.

In addition there may be an unmasking of non-lemniscal pathways, again under the influence of the central nervous system. Moller et al., (1992) reported tinnitus patients summed somatosensory stimulation (mild shock to the medial nerve) with an auditory tone which resulted in increased loudness perception. This multimodal effect is seen in young children but not adults. The non-lemniscal pathway is multimodal and the likely candidate for this effect in tinnitus patients. That pathway has a subcortical input into the limbic system and direct input into the auditory association cortex. Whether the non-lemniscal pathway can be activated by just silence has not been studied. This pathway is involved in orientation and would certainly respond to abrupt silence.

Could this pathway be switch on and off with just stepping in and out of anechoic space? Perhaps this is but one element in a cascade of effects inducing the perception of tinnitus. The artificial nature of anechoic space must activate the limbic system and in particular the amygdala. Input to the amygdala is both subcortical (non-lemniscal pathways) and cortical via the classical auditory pathways. These pathways are termed the low and high road respectively by LeDoux (1990). The amygdala is active in severe disabling tinnitus and plays a notable role in contributing to tinnitus annoyance first postulated by Shulman and Goldstein (1996).

Tinnitus is thus a perception without a sensation, that is nonetheless interactive with external sound conditions, generated by the brain.` It is the brain component (both auditory and non-auditory) that appears to be implicated much more so than the ear in the perception of tinnitus in normal hearing individuals and likely those suffering long term hearing loss. It should be apparent, then, that treatment strategies must involve neural mechanisms to be effective and masking meets that criterion in that it has central neural effects (Goldstein et al., 2001).

#### **1.2 Neuroscience of treatment**

138 Up to Date on Tinnitus

mouth, then, I heard a high frequency hissing seemingly in the middle of my head which I now identify as tinnitus. Upon exiting the chamber all such perceptions ceased. Re-entering the hissing returned as did my sense of bodily noises. The three other graduate students in the lab had the same experience as did other visiting students. We thought this was a common experience not worthy of a formal report. My hearing was at 0 dB HL up to 8 kHz (highest measured) and my minimal audible angle at 2 kHz was < 40. A few years later my high frequency hearing was measured and it too was normal up to 20 kHz. I had no more than a cursory understanding of tinnitus and concluded at the time the critical factor in its appearance was the lowered ambient noise of the chamber. With this experience in mind, I must conclude that tinnitus is naturally induced by silence. I have never experience the same tinnitus perception is single or double walled acoustic enclosures with less

Absolute silence can also be achieved with eight nerve section. Tinnitus is generally not eliminated, but can be increased by this procedure (Cope et al, 2011) although the effect was found to vary from increased to decreased tinnitus or no effect (Mollar et al., 1993). Tinnitus can be associated with severe deafness and can generally be ameliorated to degree with the electrical stimulation of a cochlear implant (Amoodi et al., 2011; Arndt et al., 2011; Pan et al.,

What then is the mechanism that produces tinnitus with just being in silence or immediately having an eight nerve sectioning, this cannot be the result of complex neural plastic changes in the brain, it is most likely a release from neural inhibition in the peripheral neural structures, probably acting the spiral ganglia by the central auditory system. This would

In addition there may be an unmasking of non-lemniscal pathways, again under the influence of the central nervous system. Moller et al., (1992) reported tinnitus patients summed somatosensory stimulation (mild shock to the medial nerve) with an auditory tone which resulted in increased loudness perception. This multimodal effect is seen in young children but not adults. The non-lemniscal pathway is multimodal and the likely candidate for this effect in tinnitus patients. That pathway has a subcortical input into the limbic system and direct input into the auditory association cortex. Whether the non-lemniscal pathway can be activated by just silence has not been studied. This pathway is involved in

Could this pathway be switch on and off with just stepping in and out of anechoic space? Perhaps this is but one element in a cascade of effects inducing the perception of tinnitus. The artificial nature of anechoic space must activate the limbic system and in particular the amygdala. Input to the amygdala is both subcortical (non-lemniscal pathways) and cortical via the classical auditory pathways. These pathways are termed the low and high road respectively by LeDoux (1990). The amygdala is active in severe disabling tinnitus and plays a notable role in contributing to tinnitus annoyance first postulated by Shulman and

Tinnitus is thus a perception without a sensation, that is nonetheless interactive with external sound conditions, generated by the brain.` It is the brain component (both auditory and non-auditory) that appears to be implicated much more so than the ear in the perception of tinnitus in normal hearing individuals and likely those suffering long term hearing loss. It should be apparent, then, that treatment strategies must involve neural mechanisms to be effective and masking meets that criterion in that it has central neural

account for the rapid turn on/off when stepping out of anechoic space and back in.

orientation and would certainly respond to abrupt silence.

attenuation.

2009).

Goldstein (1996).

effects (Goldstein et al., 2001).

Tinnitus can be present in individuals with normal hearing; however normal hearing measurement does not always indicate fully intact hair cells (Bredgerg, 1967) or a spinal ganglia free of deaffrination or even cochlea free of dead regions (Weisz et al., 2006). High frequency audiometery on tinnitus patients revealed 12 of 18 had threshold elevation in the high frequency region (10, 12, 14, 16 kHz) in one study (Shim et al., 2009). Goldstein et al., (2006) reported high hearing loss common in severe disabling tinnitus. Thus tinnitus can exist in individuals even if hearing appears unremarkable in the conventional audiometric range and some hearing loss in the very high frequencies may be more commonly present than previously believed (Goldstein et al., 2005). Further, there may be neuroplastic changes in the brain regions that code these very high frequencies, which may contribute to the tinnitus percept. Very high frequency hearing loss (>10 kHz) might benefit from very high frequency sound therapy (Goldstein et al., 2006) including ultrasonic masking Meikle et al., 1999; Lenhardt, 2003).

Overwhelmingly, hearing loss is often associated with tinnitus and it appears to be the key factor triggering the events that lead to tinnitus in humans and animals. The most frequent cause of hearing loss is intense noise which is often characterized as a high frequency loss of hearing behaviorally and a loss of hair cells and changes in the nerve and auditory synapses in the brain. Spontaneous firing rates tend to increase in the first auditory brain synapse (dorsal and ventral cochlear nucleus) as well as in the midbrain (inferior colliculus) and auditory cortex (primary and secondary)[Wienbruch et al., 2006; Eggermont and Roberts 2004]. Tinnitus neural induced changes are not limited to the classical pathways but also present in the non-classical or non-lemnsical pathways (Mollar et al., 1992) Both pathway have input into the limbic system (LeDoux, 1990) and it is the involvement of this system that form the final common pathway in tinnitus (Shulman 1995; Shulman and Goldstein 2006; Shulman et al., 2009).

The change in neurons' spontaneous firing rates along the neuraxis is also accompanied by changes in the neural tuning properties of neurons representing the peripheral region of the hearing loss (Schaetta and Kempter, 2009). The neuromechanisms that give rise to neuro hyperactivity have not been identified but some form of increased gain in the central nervous system is likely, which suggests that additional stimulation covering the effect frequency region might form the basis of sound therapy.

Norena and Eggermont (2005) reported that cats exposed to a traumatizing noise and immediately placed in a 40 dB high frequency sound environment had much less hearing loss compared with similarly exposed cats placed in a quiet environment. The hearing loss in the quiet reared cats ranged from 6 to 32 kHz with the loss, on average, 40 dB. In contrast, the hearing loss in the high frequency environment cats was restricted to 6-8 kHz at a level near 35 dB. Despite the restricted hearing loss for the high frequency stimulated cats in the 6-8 kHz range, no auditory cortical reprogramming was found, suggesting that the high frequency stimulation prevented the expected reorganization. It would seem then an effective treatment for tinnitus in humans would be very high frequency stimulation at a moderate level covering the tinnitus pitch match and the tinnitus spectrum (Schaette et al., 2010)

Encouraged by the Norena and Eggermont's (2005) study high frequency stimulation was applied with tinnitus patients and matched controls with similar sensorineural hearing loss and no history of tinnitus (Goldstein et al., 2005. The results revealed that high frequency stimulation for 5-8 weeks dramatically reduced the level of sound needed to mask tinnitus

Home Medical Device for Tinnitus Treatment 141

Maskers are wearable devices that produce a sound band to mask the tinnitus and through use, produce some measure of tinnitus inhibition. Wearable maskers have been available for the last forty years (Vernon and Meikle, 2000; 2003) and produce about 70% complete masking. Only 10% achieve no masking while the remainder exhibit diminished tinnitus perception. Maskers only cover the tinnitus and do not treat the cause. Maskers can aid in tinnitus habituation but generally they are used at a low volume for that purpose. In the table below, the experience at the Tinnitus Clinic at the Oregon Health and Science University (Vernon and Meikle, 2003) reveals that most patients can get partial or complete masking. The masking efficiency of a commercial high frequency product, UltraQuiet, has comparable efficiency and is an end element in the new technology presented herein (see Table I). Masking alone is not sufficient; the sound must also interact with the brain to

masking by wearable devices

Vernon Meikle UltraQuiet

survey

Table 1. The wearable masking devices (maskers, hearing aids and combination devices) yielded some degree of masking to 90% of the tinnitus patients in the Oregon survey. UltraQuiet, the end component in the new home based tinnitus system present here had the same level of effectiveness in masking. Long term compliance is a problem for all such devices.

• complete masking 70.5 75

• partial masking 19.6 15

• no masking 9.9 10

Hearing aids and custom maskers are expensive which can limit their utilization in the tinnitus population. Even when purchased, if these devices may be less successful over time, and if so, the patient will possibly become discouraged and abandon the approach that once was successful. It is most important for devices to be part of a structure tinnitus therapy program. Tinnitus devices are also expensive to design, achieve regulatory approval,

Since tinnitus has no known cure, a variety of treatments from pharmaceuticals to psychotherapy have be suggested; some health care providers still only offer the advice to live with it, thus tinnitus patients in the age of worldwide interaction through the web, are

reduce the effects of tinnitus.

**2.2 Economics** 

manufacture, distribute and support.

**2.3 Patient preferences** 

and thresholds of hearing improved by 5-25 dB suggesting plastic changes had occurred in the central nervous system. The animal study (Norena and Eggermont; 2005) demonstrated that sound therapy can prevent brain reprogramming as a result of one intense noise exposure; thus preserving hearing that would likely have been lost. The human data with people having long term hearing loss and some with severe tinnitus, suggest that the brain can reprogram back, modifying the neural state again, and as a result, making masking more effective at lower levels and improving hearing. Hearing improvement due solely to listening to high frequencies via the UltraQuiet system could generate skepticism; nonetheless, the limited data is very suggestive of threshold improvement due to reverse neuroplasticity in the high frequencies which did not exceed 25 dB. Further the concept is consistent with conventional auditory theory; however sampling variability is clearly a concern, resolvable with an expanded data base.

Only a few decades ago most neural scientists believed that the adult brain was hard wired, now it is well accepted the adult brain is plastic and capable of reprogramming after sensory or motor loss or with learning (Syka et al., 2003). Neural maps change with experience. Hearing loss triggers a reprogramming in the auditory cortex which results in a change in frequency response. With noise induced hearing loss, cortical neurons sensitive to the loss reprogram lower in frequency. Somehow the high frequency stimulation therapy maintains or re-establishes the original neural map. Reduced inhibition is likely the active factor in the cortical affecting the periphery to achieve enhanced hearing.

High frequency sound therapy can restore or even improve hearing by preventing auditory cortical reorganization, that is to say, the auditory cortex contributes to sound sensitivity at the ear. If the auditory cortex is ablated, the audiogram is about 25 dB poorer (see Heffner and Heffner, 1986; 1995 for reviews). The assumption is that the cortex, or its actions (efferent control), exerts an influence on hearing level at the neural periphery. Changes in hearing threshold indirectly implied central changes have taken place as a result of therapy.

#### **2. Medical masking devices for tinnitus**

There exist a number of devices for the treatment of tinnitus, however the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) identified only two, hearing aids and maskers. Combination devices are a merge of a hearing aid and a masker.

#### **2.1 Limitations**

Hearing aids are designed to amplify speech sounds and are generally limited in high frequency (<10 kHz) fidelity. Hearing aid use has been reported to be of benefit in adjusting to tinnitus particularly when combined with counseling, since tinnitus evokes a variety of emotional reactions and quality of life issues. Thus a device designed to maximize speech perception as a result of hearing loss is used to treat tinnitus. Increasing the stimulation to the brain appears to be the principal mechanism that induces suppression and or accommodation to tinnitus. Relief from the effects of tinnitus is possible for some, but long term use of hearing aids does not appear to be efficacious for most tinnitus patients. The lack of high frequency energy in hearing aids may limit their success as maskers (Schaette et al., 2010). Combination devices may have more utility (Sweetow and Sabes, 2010) and flexibility in fitting individuals with tinnitus. The use of music in a wearable combination device may be relaxing, but unless the upper frequency limit covers the tinnitus spectrum, the effectiveness may be reduced unless the music is customized (Starackle et al., 2010; Wilson et al., 2010).

and thresholds of hearing improved by 5-25 dB suggesting plastic changes had occurred in the central nervous system. The animal study (Norena and Eggermont; 2005) demonstrated that sound therapy can prevent brain reprogramming as a result of one intense noise exposure; thus preserving hearing that would likely have been lost. The human data with people having long term hearing loss and some with severe tinnitus, suggest that the brain can reprogram back, modifying the neural state again, and as a result, making masking more effective at lower levels and improving hearing. Hearing improvement due solely to listening to high frequencies via the UltraQuiet system could generate skepticism; nonetheless, the limited data is very suggestive of threshold improvement due to reverse neuroplasticity in the high frequencies which did not exceed 25 dB. Further the concept is consistent with conventional auditory theory; however sampling variability is clearly a

Only a few decades ago most neural scientists believed that the adult brain was hard wired, now it is well accepted the adult brain is plastic and capable of reprogramming after sensory or motor loss or with learning (Syka et al., 2003). Neural maps change with experience. Hearing loss triggers a reprogramming in the auditory cortex which results in a change in frequency response. With noise induced hearing loss, cortical neurons sensitive to the loss reprogram lower in frequency. Somehow the high frequency stimulation therapy maintains or re-establishes the original neural map. Reduced inhibition is likely the active factor in the

High frequency sound therapy can restore or even improve hearing by preventing auditory cortical reorganization, that is to say, the auditory cortex contributes to sound sensitivity at the ear. If the auditory cortex is ablated, the audiogram is about 25 dB poorer (see Heffner and Heffner, 1986; 1995 for reviews). The assumption is that the cortex, or its actions (efferent control), exerts an influence on hearing level at the neural periphery. Changes in hearing threshold indirectly implied central changes have taken place as a result of therapy.

There exist a number of devices for the treatment of tinnitus, however the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) identified only two, hearing aids and maskers. Combination

Hearing aids are designed to amplify speech sounds and are generally limited in high frequency (<10 kHz) fidelity. Hearing aid use has been reported to be of benefit in adjusting to tinnitus particularly when combined with counseling, since tinnitus evokes a variety of emotional reactions and quality of life issues. Thus a device designed to maximize speech perception as a result of hearing loss is used to treat tinnitus. Increasing the stimulation to the brain appears to be the principal mechanism that induces suppression and or accommodation to tinnitus. Relief from the effects of tinnitus is possible for some, but long term use of hearing aids does not appear to be efficacious for most tinnitus patients. The lack of high frequency energy in hearing aids may limit their success as maskers (Schaette et al., 2010). Combination devices may have more utility (Sweetow and Sabes, 2010) and flexibility in fitting individuals with tinnitus. The use of music in a wearable combination device may be relaxing, but unless the upper frequency limit covers the tinnitus spectrum, the effectiveness may be reduced

unless the music is customized (Starackle et al., 2010; Wilson et al., 2010).

concern, resolvable with an expanded data base.

**2. Medical masking devices for tinnitus** 

devices are a merge of a hearing aid and a masker.

**2.1 Limitations** 

cortical affecting the periphery to achieve enhanced hearing.

Maskers are wearable devices that produce a sound band to mask the tinnitus and through use, produce some measure of tinnitus inhibition. Wearable maskers have been available for the last forty years (Vernon and Meikle, 2000; 2003) and produce about 70% complete masking. Only 10% achieve no masking while the remainder exhibit diminished tinnitus perception. Maskers only cover the tinnitus and do not treat the cause. Maskers can aid in tinnitus habituation but generally they are used at a low volume for that purpose. In the table below, the experience at the Tinnitus Clinic at the Oregon Health and Science University (Vernon and Meikle, 2003) reveals that most patients can get partial or complete masking. The masking efficiency of a commercial high frequency product, UltraQuiet, has comparable efficiency and is an end element in the new technology presented herein (see Table I). Masking alone is not sufficient; the sound must also interact with the brain to reduce the effects of tinnitus.


Table 1. The wearable masking devices (maskers, hearing aids and combination devices) yielded some degree of masking to 90% of the tinnitus patients in the Oregon survey. UltraQuiet, the end component in the new home based tinnitus system present here had the same level of effectiveness in masking. Long term compliance is a problem for all such devices.

#### **2.2 Economics**

Hearing aids and custom maskers are expensive which can limit their utilization in the tinnitus population. Even when purchased, if these devices may be less successful over time, and if so, the patient will possibly become discouraged and abandon the approach that once was successful. It is most important for devices to be part of a structure tinnitus therapy program. Tinnitus devices are also expensive to design, achieve regulatory approval, manufacture, distribute and support.

#### **2.3 Patient preferences**

Since tinnitus has no known cure, a variety of treatments from pharmaceuticals to psychotherapy have be suggested; some health care providers still only offer the advice to live with it, thus tinnitus patients in the age of worldwide interaction through the web, are

Home Medical Device for Tinnitus Treatment 143

generate noise of sufficient intensity and bandwidth to mask ringing in the ears or internal head noises. Because the device is able to mask internal noises, it is also used an aid in hearing external noises and speech. TMDs include "in-the-ear" and "behind-the-ear" air conduction configurations. The device type also includes ultrasound TMDs." The FDA treats tinnitus masker devices as Class II with special controls (code KLW) such that the device must meet the FDA recommendations and provide assurances of safety and effectiveness. Specifically there must be a premarket notification that addresses any associated health risks to health and the manufacturer must obtain a substantial equivalence determination from FDA prior to marketing the device. That is what devices on the market are similar to the

The manufacturer may submit a traditional 510(k) or an abbreviated 510(k). An abbreviated 510(k) provides the least burdensome means of demonstrating substantial equivalence for a new device. The abbreviated 510(k) submission must include the proposed labeling for the new device specifying device description, intended use, and directions. Furthermore, information on device development, performance specifications, testing methods, test data and description of the risk analysis used must be furnished. A labeled drawing, similar to that used in a patent and a discussion of the device characteristics related to the risks in a class II special controls device is needed as well as a declaration of conformity to any

A traditional 510(k) must meet all of the informational and data requirements of an abbreviated 510(k) including methods, data, acceptance criteria, and conclusions; however

a description of the principle of operation (i.e., the scientific principles behind how the

detailed dimensions of the circular tip area of the transducer that will contact the

The safety risks and the mitigations are summarized in Table II. Note that the mitigations

Generally three predicate devices are selected to show how the new device is both similar to and different from the FDA submitted device. The manufacturers, predicate device names,

Preclinical and clinical studies for traditional 510(k) application can be submitted if needed. FDA recommends a preclinical to evaluate the biocompatibility of device materials contacting patients if it is not already approved. For ultrasound TMDs, a risk analysis of potential ultrasonic energy adverse effects, as tissue heating of tissue or changes in auditory threshold, must be submitted. Maximum output intensity must be measured and reported

Clinical studies are not usually required, but if needed, the following specifications are

and 510(k) numbers should accompany the comparative performance comparisons.

standard selected adhering to the testing described in the standard.

"a description of the components of the device and its assembly,

the device description is more formal including:

engineering drawings, if applicable,

device achieves its intended use).

how the static force is achieved."

mastoid area,

are labeling and testing

to avoid cavitation.

recommended:

 a description of any accessories used with the device, the range of dimensions, shapes, and device designs,

For ultrasound TMDs, engineering drawings should show:

associated static force necessary to achieve output levels, and

new device.

often weary of new treatment approaches, especially expensive ones. Effective tinnitus approaches require patience, perseverance, commitment and discipline. Nonetheless, the typical patient is looking for a cure not a long term treatment. The tinnitus device should be considered only a tool not a solution in and of itself. The tool must be used regularly for full benefit (Del Bo and Ambrosetti 2007).

#### **2.4 Innovation based on best practices and science**

Treatment of tinnitus with high frequency signals that cover the tinnitus pitch frequencies (areas of hearing loss) and higher has been shown to be effective using behavioral and imaging studies(Goldstein et al., 2001;2005;Shulman et al., 2004). Nonetheless, the compliance of patients has been less than expected (~75% improvement) outside the research laboratory environment. There is a need for a home based unit that will provide the needed time of treatment to insure success. It is hypothesized that a stand-alone home unit will lead to a greater success rate in treating tinnitus, especially in environments lacking audiological infrastructure and /or professional supervision. Tinnitus devices, dissimilar to hearing aids, are more strictly regulated. The UltraQuiet device is the interface to the patient in a new home unit to be described and that interface has received regulatory clearance.

#### **2.5 UltraQuiet**

UltraQuiet is a tinnitus therapy product that provides patterned auditory stimulation in the high audio and into ultrasonic ranges (10-22 kHz) using a bone conduction transducer; and is based on the work of Lenhardt (2003), demonstrating ultrasonic perception by humans. UltraQuiet therapy differs from conventional maskers by providing very high frequency (5- 22 kHz) sound therapy. In UltraQuiet therapy, the auditory stimulation is processed music that has been pre-filtered and up shifted in pitch using amplitude modulation (upper sideband). Music was selected as the core of the stimulus since it was found to be more effective tinnitus masker than noise (see Wilson et al., 2010 for review) since music engages more central and cognitive processes. The tinnitus treatment stimulus was produced using Kyma Version 5 software with a Capybara 320 Sound Computation Engine (Symbolic Sound Corporation, Champaign, IL) and stored on a compact disk (CD). The CD signal was fed into a custom-made amplifier delivered to the skin off the head in the mastoid region using a piezoelectric bone conduction transducer. The transducer was held in place by a plastic headband found to have comparable force as a standard metal audiometric bone conduction headband. Although the stimulus is presented on only one side of the head, it is heard binaurally through bone conduction, although it is about 5 dB sensation level (SL) more intense on the fitted side. In UltraQuiet therapy, the processed and frequency shifted music is presented at 12 dB SL for minimum periods of 1 hour twice weekly with daily use encouraged. The goal is to effect changes in the central nervous system mechanisms of tinnitus, resulting in long-term inhibition (Goldstein et al., 2001; 2005).

#### **2.6 Regulatory issues**

The US FDA (www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/default.htm) recognizes two types of tinnitus treatment devices, hearing aids and tinnitus masker devices (TMD). The later can be used in a variety of forms as wearable devices and appliques for temporary relief. The use of personal music devices for relaxation, as long as no medical claims are made, is unregulated. The FDA defines "a tinnitus masker is an electronic device intended to

often weary of new treatment approaches, especially expensive ones. Effective tinnitus approaches require patience, perseverance, commitment and discipline. Nonetheless, the typical patient is looking for a cure not a long term treatment. The tinnitus device should be considered only a tool not a solution in and of itself. The tool must be used regularly for full

Treatment of tinnitus with high frequency signals that cover the tinnitus pitch frequencies (areas of hearing loss) and higher has been shown to be effective using behavioral and imaging studies(Goldstein et al., 2001;2005;Shulman et al., 2004). Nonetheless, the compliance of patients has been less than expected (~75% improvement) outside the research laboratory environment. There is a need for a home based unit that will provide the needed time of treatment to insure success. It is hypothesized that a stand-alone home unit will lead to a greater success rate in treating tinnitus, especially in environments lacking audiological infrastructure and /or professional supervision. Tinnitus devices, dissimilar to hearing aids, are more strictly regulated. The UltraQuiet device is the interface to the patient in a new home unit to be described and that interface has received regulatory clearance.

UltraQuiet is a tinnitus therapy product that provides patterned auditory stimulation in the high audio and into ultrasonic ranges (10-22 kHz) using a bone conduction transducer; and is based on the work of Lenhardt (2003), demonstrating ultrasonic perception by humans. UltraQuiet therapy differs from conventional maskers by providing very high frequency (5- 22 kHz) sound therapy. In UltraQuiet therapy, the auditory stimulation is processed music that has been pre-filtered and up shifted in pitch using amplitude modulation (upper sideband). Music was selected as the core of the stimulus since it was found to be more effective tinnitus masker than noise (see Wilson et al., 2010 for review) since music engages more central and cognitive processes. The tinnitus treatment stimulus was produced using Kyma Version 5 software with a Capybara 320 Sound Computation Engine (Symbolic Sound Corporation, Champaign, IL) and stored on a compact disk (CD). The CD signal was fed into a custom-made amplifier delivered to the skin off the head in the mastoid region using a piezoelectric bone conduction transducer. The transducer was held in place by a plastic headband found to have comparable force as a standard metal audiometric bone conduction headband. Although the stimulus is presented on only one side of the head, it is heard binaurally through bone conduction, although it is about 5 dB sensation level (SL) more intense on the fitted side. In UltraQuiet therapy, the processed and frequency shifted music is presented at 12 dB SL for minimum periods of 1 hour twice weekly with daily use encouraged. The goal is to effect changes in the central nervous system mechanisms of

The US FDA (www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/default.htm) recognizes two types of tinnitus treatment devices, hearing aids and tinnitus masker devices (TMD). The later can be used in a variety of forms as wearable devices and appliques for temporary relief. The use of personal music devices for relaxation, as long as no medical claims are made, is unregulated. The FDA defines "a tinnitus masker is an electronic device intended to

tinnitus, resulting in long-term inhibition (Goldstein et al., 2001; 2005).

benefit (Del Bo and Ambrosetti 2007).

**2.5 UltraQuiet** 

**2.6 Regulatory issues** 

**2.4 Innovation based on best practices and science** 

generate noise of sufficient intensity and bandwidth to mask ringing in the ears or internal head noises. Because the device is able to mask internal noises, it is also used an aid in hearing external noises and speech. TMDs include "in-the-ear" and "behind-the-ear" air conduction configurations. The device type also includes ultrasound TMDs." The FDA treats tinnitus masker devices as Class II with special controls (code KLW) such that the device must meet the FDA recommendations and provide assurances of safety and effectiveness. Specifically there must be a premarket notification that addresses any associated health risks to health and the manufacturer must obtain a substantial equivalence determination from FDA prior to marketing the device. That is what devices on the market are similar to the new device.

The manufacturer may submit a traditional 510(k) or an abbreviated 510(k). An abbreviated 510(k) provides the least burdensome means of demonstrating substantial equivalence for a new device. The abbreviated 510(k) submission must include the proposed labeling for the new device specifying device description, intended use, and directions. Furthermore, information on device development, performance specifications, testing methods, test data and description of the risk analysis used must be furnished. A labeled drawing, similar to that used in a patent and a discussion of the device characteristics related to the risks in a class II special controls device is needed as well as a declaration of conformity to any standard selected adhering to the testing described in the standard.

A traditional 510(k) must meet all of the informational and data requirements of an abbreviated 510(k) including methods, data, acceptance criteria, and conclusions; however the device description is more formal including:


For ultrasound TMDs, engineering drawings should show:


The safety risks and the mitigations are summarized in Table II. Note that the mitigations are labeling and testing

Generally three predicate devices are selected to show how the new device is both similar to and different from the FDA submitted device. The manufacturers, predicate device names, and 510(k) numbers should accompany the comparative performance comparisons.

Preclinical and clinical studies for traditional 510(k) application can be submitted if needed. FDA recommends a preclinical to evaluate the biocompatibility of device materials contacting patients if it is not already approved. For ultrasound TMDs, a risk analysis of potential ultrasonic energy adverse effects, as tissue heating of tissue or changes in auditory threshold, must be submitted. Maximum output intensity must be measured and reported to avoid cavitation.

Clinical studies are not usually required, but if needed, the following specifications are recommended:

Home Medical Device for Tinnitus Treatment 145

by Schaette et al., (2010) is a similar but not identical study. The issue is not masking since

The critical elements in tinnitus maskers for the purpose of brain therapy are very high frequency stimulation, beyond standard hearing aids, individual adjustability for custom fitting and the ability to affect tinnitus loudness through dedicated use. Treatment of tinnitus with high frequency signals that cover the tinnitus pitch frequencies (areas of hearing loss) and higher has been shown to be effective using behavioral and imaging studies (Shulman et al., 2004; Lanting et al., 2009 for review). The use of the UltraQuiet device with a pass band of 6-20 kHz not only masked the tinnitus but also reduced minimal masking levels by an average of 10 dB (5-25 dB), increased hearing in the tinnitus spectrum by 10 dB and reduced tinnitus severity by questionnaire over a period of eight weeks (Goldstein et al., 2005). Nonetheless, the compliance of patients has been less than expected outside the research laboratory environment unless the device is used in context of counseling and support. There is a need for a home based unit that will provide the time needed to insure therapeutic success, especially

in environments lacking audiological infrastructure and /or professional supervision.

Bone conduction delivery is employed to provide a comfortable high frequency listening experience. The transducer is a custom-made aluminum ceramic bimorph with a highfrequency limit of 50 kHz. The transducer is coupled to the skin and held in place with a band, much as are traditional clinical bone-conduction transducers. Rather than using synthetic recorded stimuli the sound from a television is the source which is encode by a directional microphone (or direct out port), high passed filtered (4kHz) and amplitude modulated by a variable carrier(s). The carrier can be tuned by the patient (that is selected from ~4 to 20+ kHz) to match their tinnitus and compensate for their skull acoustics by adjusting to "confortable (a mixture of the carrier frequency and idiopathic skull resonances). The carrier can be set to sweep if adjustment is not desired. In the frequency sweep mode the modulated audio sound retains it pitch qualities but varies in loudness as brain/skull resonances are passed by the sweep. The wideband multiplication and a summing analog modulator circuit have easy to use dial-in carrier frequencies. This module outputs to an amplifier and bone conduction transducer (UltraQuiet). All the processing is preengineered in the module (Vicari et al., 2008). In the first example a sibilant sound /s/ (Figure 1) is modulated by two carriers at 6 and 12 kHz. The amplitude of the 12 kHz carrier is higher by 10 dB to increase salience. An example of speech prior to being filtered and modulated is depicted in the upper panel (A) of Figure 2. After the speech signal is modulated (multiplied) by twin carriers (19 and 22 kHz) the resulting full amplitude modulated signal has an effective band width of 16-24 kHz (panel B). The use of this system will enhance intelligibility (Vicari et al., 2008) but the rationale is to use television as an engaging source for high frequency therapy as well as conventional

The details of the system are presented in Figure 3. The anticipated source is a television to maintain interest, but it could be a radio, computer or any media device, the signal is fed into a modulator (modified Analog Devices ADL 5319). The carrier(s) is supplied by a modified oscillator chip (Analog Devices AD 5932 generator) with a programmable frequency profile. The carrier can be swept in frequency over the tinnitus spectrum and higher. Alternatively two carriers can be used that are fixed or sweep over more constrained ranges over the same tinnitus spectrum. The carrier frequency shift is not perceived as changes in pitch as much as loudness fluctuations as the carrier interact with head resonances. When the modulating

most individuals can experience tinnitus masking.

**2.8 Tinnitus masker for in home use** 

listening and viewing.


Table 2. The safety risks and the suggest FDA mitigation


If a clinical study is carried out it should address issues related to changes in auditory thresholds, pre- and post-exposure to ultrasonic masking stimuli, possible negative side effects of fatigue, headaches, nausea, irritability, and "fullness" in the ear. If a clinical study is needed to demonstrate substantial equivalence, i.e., conducted prior to obtaining 510(k) clearance of the device, the study must be conducted under the Investigational Device Exemptions (IDE) and have institutional review board (IRB) approval with signed and understood, informed consent.

The European Union (EU) assigns medical devices to four groups according to their level of perceived risk before they are approved. Class I is low risk, IIa (tinnitus maskers), IIb (which includes diagnostic radiology equipment) and Class III is high risk (implantable devices). Compliance with the EU guideline leads to CE (conformance mark) certification for medical devices. The method of device development includes specifying performance to specifications, hazard analysis, frequency measurement, function assessment, safety and sustainability must be documentation before applying for the CE mark.

#### **2.7 Innovation in sound therapy**

The animal work of (Norena and Eggermont, 2005) indicates that moderate levels of high frequency noise stimulation post noise exposure mitigated the neuroreprograming in the auditory cortex characteristically associated with tinnitus. This is direct substantiation that external sound or masking can alter the neural substrate of tinnitus. Moffat et al., (2009) applied these concepts to humans by fitting tinnitus patients with either standard hearing aids or aids with a broad frequency response to 8 kHz. Neither amplification scheme altered the tinnitus spectrum or its loudness. The most obvious conclusion is there was insufficient high frequency stimulation to alter the tinnitus spectrum. The same conclusion was reached

risks mitigation

labeling; clinical testing

• worsening of tinnitus labeling; clinical testing

• change in hearing preclinical testing;

• adverse tissue reaction preclinical testing • electrical hazards preclinical testing

"design, i.e., masking pattern, peak intensity or duration, etc. dissimilar from any

If a clinical study is carried out it should address issues related to changes in auditory thresholds, pre- and post-exposure to ultrasonic masking stimuli, possible negative side effects of fatigue, headaches, nausea, irritability, and "fullness" in the ear. If a clinical study is needed to demonstrate substantial equivalence, i.e., conducted prior to obtaining 510(k) clearance of the device, the study must be conducted under the Investigational Device Exemptions (IDE) and have institutional review board (IRB) approval with signed and

The European Union (EU) assigns medical devices to four groups according to their level of perceived risk before they are approved. Class I is low risk, IIa (tinnitus maskers), IIb (which includes diagnostic radiology equipment) and Class III is high risk (implantable devices). Compliance with the EU guideline leads to CE (conformance mark) certification for medical devices. The method of device development includes specifying performance to specifications, hazard analysis, frequency measurement, function assessment, safety and

The animal work of (Norena and Eggermont, 2005) indicates that moderate levels of high frequency noise stimulation post noise exposure mitigated the neuroreprograming in the auditory cortex characteristically associated with tinnitus. This is direct substantiation that external sound or masking can alter the neural substrate of tinnitus. Moffat et al., (2009) applied these concepts to humans by fitting tinnitus patients with either standard hearing aids or aids with a broad frequency response to 8 kHz. Neither amplification scheme altered the tinnitus spectrum or its loudness. The most obvious conclusion is there was insufficient high frequency stimulation to alter the tinnitus spectrum. The same conclusion was reached

new technology, i.e., technology different from that used in legally marketed TMDs;

(ultrasonics) preclinical testing

Table 2. The safety risks and the suggest FDA mitigation

• tissue heating

understood, informed consent.

**2.7 Innovation in sound therapy** 

design previously cleared under a premarket notification;

• improper use labeling

sustainability must be documentation before applying for the CE mark.

Indications for use dissimilar from TMDs of the same type.'

by Schaette et al., (2010) is a similar but not identical study. The issue is not masking since most individuals can experience tinnitus masking.

The critical elements in tinnitus maskers for the purpose of brain therapy are very high frequency stimulation, beyond standard hearing aids, individual adjustability for custom fitting and the ability to affect tinnitus loudness through dedicated use. Treatment of tinnitus with high frequency signals that cover the tinnitus pitch frequencies (areas of hearing loss) and higher has been shown to be effective using behavioral and imaging studies (Shulman et al., 2004; Lanting et al., 2009 for review). The use of the UltraQuiet device with a pass band of 6-20 kHz not only masked the tinnitus but also reduced minimal masking levels by an average of 10 dB (5-25 dB), increased hearing in the tinnitus spectrum by 10 dB and reduced tinnitus severity by questionnaire over a period of eight weeks (Goldstein et al., 2005). Nonetheless, the compliance of patients has been less than expected outside the research laboratory environment unless the device is used in context of counseling and support. There is a need for a home based unit that will provide the time needed to insure therapeutic success, especially in environments lacking audiological infrastructure and /or professional supervision.

#### **2.8 Tinnitus masker for in home use**

Bone conduction delivery is employed to provide a comfortable high frequency listening experience. The transducer is a custom-made aluminum ceramic bimorph with a highfrequency limit of 50 kHz. The transducer is coupled to the skin and held in place with a band, much as are traditional clinical bone-conduction transducers. Rather than using synthetic recorded stimuli the sound from a television is the source which is encode by a directional microphone (or direct out port), high passed filtered (4kHz) and amplitude modulated by a variable carrier(s). The carrier can be tuned by the patient (that is selected from ~4 to 20+ kHz) to match their tinnitus and compensate for their skull acoustics by adjusting to "confortable (a mixture of the carrier frequency and idiopathic skull resonances). The carrier can be set to sweep if adjustment is not desired. In the frequency sweep mode the modulated audio sound retains it pitch qualities but varies in loudness as brain/skull resonances are passed by the sweep. The wideband multiplication and a summing analog modulator circuit have easy to use dial-in carrier frequencies. This module outputs to an amplifier and bone conduction transducer (UltraQuiet). All the processing is preengineered in the module (Vicari et al., 2008). In the first example a sibilant sound /s/ (Figure 1) is modulated by two carriers at 6 and 12 kHz. The amplitude of the 12 kHz carrier is higher by 10 dB to increase salience. An example of speech prior to being filtered and modulated is depicted in the upper panel (A) of Figure 2. After the speech signal is modulated (multiplied) by twin carriers (19 and 22 kHz) the resulting full amplitude modulated signal has an effective band width of 16-24 kHz (panel B). The use of this system will enhance intelligibility (Vicari et al., 2008) but the rationale is

to use television as an engaging source for high frequency therapy as well as conventional listening and viewing.

The details of the system are presented in Figure 3. The anticipated source is a television to maintain interest, but it could be a radio, computer or any media device, the signal is fed into a modulator (modified Analog Devices ADL 5319). The carrier(s) is supplied by a modified oscillator chip (Analog Devices AD 5932 generator) with a programmable frequency profile. The carrier can be swept in frequency over the tinnitus spectrum and higher. Alternatively two carriers can be used that are fixed or sweep over more constrained ranges over the same tinnitus spectrum. The carrier frequency shift is not perceived as changes in pitch as much as loudness fluctuations as the carrier interact with head resonances. When the modulating

Home Medical Device for Tinnitus Treatment 147

of the 12 kHz carrier the USB signal would have a pass band from 14-20 kHz. AM mode is not used for speech perception since the carrier is the strongest signal, usually very audible; resulting in hearing a steady pitch plus the modulated speech. For tinnitus masking, this is not such a problem because the goal is high frequency stimulation. As depicted in Figure 3 (upper panel A) there is an attenuator to adjust the level of high frequency stimulation which should be 12 dB above sensation level (SL). Low level stimulation is important because hyperacusis is always a concern in severe tinnitus. Returning to Figure 3 (B panel) the output of the modulator, appropriately attenuated is amplified and fed into a custom aluminum ceramic transducer. The transducer should be placed on the skin of the head near the ear, the mastoid region is recommended. Alternatively, the transducer can be placed on the skin of the skull in front of the ear, on the so called "ultrasonic window". The maximum output for the FDA approved amplified/transducer is < 76 dB SPL equivalent (maximum force is 100 dB re 1 μN), thus this would be unsuitable for those (ager 18+) with more than a 60 dB HL hearing loss. A newer amplifier has 20 dB more output. The frequency sweep

Fig. 3. The home medical device for tinnitus is depicted. The essential elements, oscillator,

In reference to the UltraQuiet amplifier and transducer's FDA compliance, the force exerted by bone conduction vibrators in audiometry and its relation to hearing level is normally measured according to standard ANSI S3.43-1992, for frequencies up to 4 kHz. There is no standard for calibration of bone conduction force in the UltraQuiet™ range from 6 kHz to 20 kHz. There are also no artificial mastoids with impedance calibrated in this range. The following measurements use a frequency of 6 kHz, and extrapolate the results to the higher frequencies. Although the standard is given in force, measurements are often made in acceleration for practical reasons, and converted to force (Hakansson et al., 1985). Hakansson et al., in their calibration of direct bone conduction, faced a similar need to

modulator and amplifier are fed into an UltraQuiet amplifier and transducer after preprocessing a television signal (panel A). The entire system is depicted in panel B.

extrapolate from existing standards.

mode may be best if limited audiometric infrastructure is available.

frequency (filtered television signal with a 2-8 kHz pass band) is multiplied by a carrier the result is the carrier plus and minus the modulator. So if the carrier is 12 kHz the resulting signal is 12 +/- 2-8 kHz. The carrier is present in full amplitude Modulation (AM) absent in carrier suppressed modulation (CSM) and absent along with lower sideband in upper sideband modulation (USM). Going forward with the example

Fig. 1. The double carrier modulation of /s/ is depicted.

Fig. 2. The speech segment to be modulated is depicted in panel A, and the dual carrier modulation is depicted in panel B. By selecting the appropriate carrier or carriers the high frequency stimulation can be shifted and customized to the patient to treat the tinnitus pitch, spectrum and higher frequency areas as indicated by high frequency audiometry.

frequency (filtered television signal with a 2-8 kHz pass band) is multiplied by a carrier the result is the carrier plus and minus the modulator. So if the carrier is 12 kHz the resulting signal is 12 +/- 2-8 kHz. The carrier is present in full amplitude Modulation (AM) absent in carrier suppressed modulation (CSM) and absent along with lower sideband in upper

**upper sideband modulation /s/** dual carriers

0 4k 8k 12k 16k

frequency (kHz)

Working : Input : Input : FFT Analyzer

[Hz] 

**A**

Fig. 2. The speech segment to be modulated is depicted in panel A, and the dual carrier modulation is depicted in panel B. By selecting the appropriate carrier or carriers the high frequency stimulation can be shifted and customized to the patient to treat the tinnitus pitch, spectrum and higher frequency areas as indicated by high frequency audiometry.

0 4k 8k 12k 16k 20k 24k

**frequency (kHz)**

[Hz]

sideband modulation (USM). Going forward with the example

Fig. 1. The double carrier modulation of /s/ is depicted.




relative dB



**dB re 1 V**




**B**



0


of the 12 kHz carrier the USB signal would have a pass band from 14-20 kHz. AM mode is not used for speech perception since the carrier is the strongest signal, usually very audible; resulting in hearing a steady pitch plus the modulated speech. For tinnitus masking, this is not such a problem because the goal is high frequency stimulation. As depicted in Figure 3 (upper panel A) there is an attenuator to adjust the level of high frequency stimulation which should be 12 dB above sensation level (SL). Low level stimulation is important because hyperacusis is always a concern in severe tinnitus. Returning to Figure 3 (B panel) the output of the modulator, appropriately attenuated is amplified and fed into a custom aluminum ceramic transducer. The transducer should be placed on the skin of the head near the ear, the mastoid region is recommended. Alternatively, the transducer can be placed on the skin of the skull in front of the ear, on the so called "ultrasonic window". The maximum output for the FDA approved amplified/transducer is < 76 dB SPL equivalent (maximum force is 100 dB re 1 μN), thus this would be unsuitable for those (ager 18+) with more than a 60 dB HL hearing loss. A newer amplifier has 20 dB more output. The frequency sweep mode may be best if limited audiometric infrastructure is available.

Fig. 3. The home medical device for tinnitus is depicted. The essential elements, oscillator, modulator and amplifier are fed into an UltraQuiet amplifier and transducer after preprocessing a television signal (panel A). The entire system is depicted in panel B.

In reference to the UltraQuiet amplifier and transducer's FDA compliance, the force exerted by bone conduction vibrators in audiometry and its relation to hearing level is normally measured according to standard ANSI S3.43-1992, for frequencies up to 4 kHz. There is no standard for calibration of bone conduction force in the UltraQuiet™ range from 6 kHz to 20 kHz. There are also no artificial mastoids with impedance calibrated in this range. The following measurements use a frequency of 6 kHz, and extrapolate the results to the higher frequencies. Although the standard is given in force, measurements are often made in acceleration for practical reasons, and converted to force (Hakansson et al., 1985). Hakansson et al., in their calibration of direct bone conduction, faced a similar need to extrapolate from existing standards.

Home Medical Device for Tinnitus Treatment 149

Tinnitus and hearing loss are military service-related disabilities for which veteran compensation costs are high and expanding with world-wide theaters of operation (Fausti et al., 2009; Veterans Affairs, 2009). Tinnitus can be induced from blast and noise exposure and a recreational used therapy system can be beneficial in recovery. Rehabilitating injured warfighters can increase readiness as well as be a component in total care. Future plans are to develop a wearable UltraQuiet paired with various types personal listening and

In summary this tinnitus masking system will deliver high frequency bone conduction stimulation without interfering with the television broadcast acoustics, such that patients can watch engaging television programming and receive tinnitus treatment. The innovation is effortless use by embedding the technology into a recreational activity. High frequency bone conduction stimulation was found to be effective in producing residual inhibition (suppression of tinnitus after device is turned off) and reported in 2001 (Goldstein et al.) before the animal studies provided a rational for such treatment. The bioeffect is now known to be more than residual inhibition, but neuroreprogramming in the auditory and limbic systems. There is no effectiveness if the treatment is not carried out. The goal is high frequency treatment that is effective and fully utilized by wedding it to a recreational use, which in turn would translate into improved quality of life for

UltraQuiet is now the property of Ceres Biotechnology LLC, Richmond Virginia 23298-

Amoodi HA, Mick PT, Shipp DB, Friesen LM, Nedzelski JM, Chen JM, Lin VY. (2011). The

Annual Benefits Report, Fiscal Year 2009. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration. (http://www.vba.va.gov/REPORTS/abr/2009\_abr.pdf) Arndt S, Aschendorff A, Laszig R, Beck R, Schild C, Kroeger S, Ihorst G, Wesarg T. (2011).

Bredberg G. (1967). The human cochlea during development and aging. *The Journal of* 

Del Bo L, Forti S, Ambrosetti U, Costanzo S, Mauro D, Ugazio G, Langguth B, Mancuso A.

Del Bo L, & Ambrosetti U. (2007). Hearing aids for the treatment of tinnitus. *Progress in Brain* 

the influence on quality of life. *Laryngoscope*. Jul;121(7):1536-40.

*Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery*. Sep;139(3):391-4.

effects of unilateral cochlear implantation on the tinnitus handicap inventory and

Comparison of pseudobinaural hearing to real binaural hearing rehabilitation after cochlear implantation in patients with unilateral deafness and tinnitus. *Otology and* 

(2008). Tinnitus aurium in persons with normal hearing: 55 years later.

multimedia devices for tinnitus therapy.

**3. Summary** 

millions globally.

**5. References** 

0168.

**4. Acknowledgment** 

*Neurotology.* Jan;32(1):39-47.

*Ressearch*. 166:341-5.

*Laryngology & Otology*, 81: 739-758.

The formula for calculation of force is F = |Z| x A/ω, where: F = force in N, A = acceleration in m/s2, |Z| = mechanical point impedance in Ns/m, ω = angular frequency (radians/s).

Using the above equation, the following numbers apply to 6 kHz, taken from Table 1 in Hakansson et al. (1985), based on the Reference Equivalent Threshold Force Levels (RETFL) as proposed in ISO/DIS 7566, and the mechanical impedance of the head at the skin surface in the draft revision of IEC publication 373, 1971.


The measurement system consisted of a Brüel & Kjaer 4374 accelerometer with a Brüel & Kjaer Pulse 3560 analysis system. As reference levels for calibration, a Radioear B-71 bone vibrator was used with its standard headband as the static force (measured at 4.4 N) compared to a plastic headband with a static force of 1.5 N and an Madsen Orbiter 922 audiometer, at 0 dB HL and 55 dB HL, on a live human head, since no artificial mastoids are calibrated in the higher frequency range. There was no difference between the two headbands; with complete coupling, the difference in static force made no difference in the measured acceleration. A simple plastic headband was selected for comfort and appearance.

Based on the above table, using an artificial mastoid, at 0 dB HL and 6 kHz, the force should be 40.0 dB and the acceleration should be -2.5 dB. In the experimental arrangement, the acceleration was –12.5 dB re 1 m/s2. Thus a correction factor of 10.0 dB must be added to the data to yield measurements comparable to the standard. This is similar to the method used by Hakansson et al. (1985) to arrive at correction factors for direct bone conduction via a screw attached to the skull. In the same experimental arrangement, the 55 dB HL signal from the audiometer produced a 42.0 dB re 1 m/s2 acceleration (54.5 dB more than the –12.5 dB acceleration at 0 dB HL), confirming the linearity of the system within 0.5 dB.

The minimum recommended use is one hour daily. Effectiveness can be assessed with tinnitus outcome questionnaires to establish a baseline of functioning; these include the tinnitus intensity index, the annoyance index, and the tinnitus severity index (Goldstein et al.,2001; 2004) which can be filled out by home users.

A stand-alone in home use tinnitus device that employs a recreational source of sound (television) minimizes the need to be in proximity to a hearing health care facility for treatment. Further low cost therapy can be delivered without expensive hospital or practice based facilities; all but eliminating multiple office visits. Compliance will likely improve increasing outcomes. One time purchase eliminated the need for third party carriers to fund on going therapy, particularly in population with a disproportionate access to conventional services. The in home UltraQuiet device will not require special training other than some initial familiarization with the device controls and protocol. There is no need for a medical resource environment for its operation.

Tinnitus and hearing loss are military service-related disabilities for which veteran compensation costs are high and expanding with world-wide theaters of operation (Fausti et al., 2009; Veterans Affairs, 2009). Tinnitus can be induced from blast and noise exposure and a recreational used therapy system can be beneficial in recovery. Rehabilitating injured warfighters can increase readiness as well as be a component in total care. Future plans are to develop a wearable UltraQuiet paired with various types personal listening and multimedia devices for tinnitus therapy.

#### **3. Summary**

148 Up to Date on Tinnitus

The formula for calculation of force is F = |Z| x A/ω, where: F = force in N, A = acceleration in m/s2, |Z| = mechanical point impedance in Ns/m, ω = angular frequency

Using the above equation, the following numbers apply to 6 kHz, taken from Table 1 in Hakansson et al. (1985), based on the Reference Equivalent Threshold Force Levels (RETFL) as proposed in ISO/DIS 7566, and the mechanical impedance of the head at the skin surface

The measurement system consisted of a Brüel & Kjaer 4374 accelerometer with a Brüel & Kjaer Pulse 3560 analysis system. As reference levels for calibration, a Radioear B-71 bone vibrator was used with its standard headband as the static force (measured at 4.4 N) compared to a plastic headband with a static force of 1.5 N and an Madsen Orbiter 922 audiometer, at 0 dB HL and 55 dB HL, on a live human head, since no artificial mastoids are calibrated in the higher frequency range. There was no difference between the two headbands; with complete coupling, the difference in static force made no difference in the measured acceleration. A simple plastic headband was selected for comfort and

Based on the above table, using an artificial mastoid, at 0 dB HL and 6 kHz, the force should be 40.0 dB and the acceleration should be -2.5 dB. In the experimental arrangement, the acceleration was –12.5 dB re 1 m/s2. Thus a correction factor of 10.0 dB must be added to the data to yield measurements comparable to the standard. This is similar to the method used by Hakansson et al. (1985) to arrive at correction factors for direct bone conduction via a screw attached to the skull. In the same experimental arrangement, the 55 dB HL signal from the audiometer produced a 42.0 dB re 1 m/s2 acceleration (54.5 dB more than the –12.5 dB acceleration at 0 dB HL), confirming the

The minimum recommended use is one hour daily. Effectiveness can be assessed with tinnitus outcome questionnaires to establish a baseline of functioning; these include the tinnitus intensity index, the annoyance index, and the tinnitus severity index (Goldstein et

A stand-alone in home use tinnitus device that employs a recreational source of sound (television) minimizes the need to be in proximity to a hearing health care facility for treatment. Further low cost therapy can be delivered without expensive hospital or practice based facilities; all but eliminating multiple office visits. Compliance will likely improve increasing outcomes. One time purchase eliminated the need for third party carriers to fund on going therapy, particularly in population with a disproportionate access to conventional services. The in home UltraQuiet device will not require special training other than some initial familiarization with the device controls and protocol. There is no need for a medical

(radians/s).

appearance.

linearity of the system within 0.5 dB.

resource environment for its operation.

al.,2001; 2004) which can be filled out by home users.

in the draft revision of IEC publication 373, 1971.

Frequency: 6000 Hz RETFL (dB re 1 mN): 40.0 dB Mechanical Impedance (dB re: 1 Ns/m): 34.0 dB

RETAL (dB acceleration re: 1 cm/s2): 17.5 dB (-2.5 dB re 1 m/s2)

In summary this tinnitus masking system will deliver high frequency bone conduction stimulation without interfering with the television broadcast acoustics, such that patients can watch engaging television programming and receive tinnitus treatment. The innovation is effortless use by embedding the technology into a recreational activity. High frequency bone conduction stimulation was found to be effective in producing residual inhibition (suppression of tinnitus after device is turned off) and reported in 2001 (Goldstein et al.) before the animal studies provided a rational for such treatment. The bioeffect is now known to be more than residual inhibition, but neuroreprogramming in the auditory and limbic systems. There is no effectiveness if the treatment is not carried out. The goal is high frequency treatment that is effective and fully utilized by wedding it to a recreational use, which in turn would translate into improved quality of life for millions globally.

#### **4. Acknowledgment**

UltraQuiet is now the property of Ceres Biotechnology LLC, Richmond Virginia 23298- 0168.

#### **5. References**


Home Medical Device for Tinnitus Treatment 151

Moller AR, Moller MB, Yokota M. (1992). Some forms of tinnitus may involve the

Møller MB, Møller AR, Jannetta PJ, Jho HD. (1993). Vascular decompression surgery for severe tinnitus: selection criteria and results. *Laryngoscope*. Apr;103(4 Pt 1):421-7. Noreña AJ, & Eggermont JJ (2005). Enriched acoustic environment after noise trauma

Pan T, Tyler RS, Ji H, Coelho C, Gehringer AK, Gogel SA. (2009). Changes in the tinnitus

Schaette R. & Kempter R. (2010). Predicting tinnitus pitch from patients' audiograms with a

Schaette R, König O, Hornig D, Gross M, Kempter R (2010). Acoustic stimulation treatments

Shulman A. & Goldstein B. (1996). A final common pathway for tinnitus -Implications for

Shulman A. (1995). A final common pathway for tinnitus - The medial temporal lobe

Shulman A, Strashun A.M., Avitable J, Lenhardt M.L. Goldstein BA. (2004). Ultra-High

Shulman, A, Goldstein, B, Strashun AM. (2009) Final Common Pathway for Tinnitus:

Sweetow RW. & Sabes JH. (2010). Effects of acoustical stimuli delivered through hearing

Syka J. (2004). Plastic changes in central auditory system after hearing loss, restoration of

Tucker DA, Phillips SL, Ruth RA, Clayton WA, Royster E, Todd AD. (2005). The effect of

Vernon JA, & Meikle MB. (2000). Tinnitus masking. In RS Tyler (ed.), Tinnitus Handbook.

Vernon JA, & Meikle MB. (2003). Masking devices alprazolam treatment for tinnitus.

Vicari J, Slane J, Madsen, AG, Lenhardt, ML. (2008). Increasing the Effective Use of

Weisz N, hartmann T, Dohrmann K, Schlee W, Norena A. (2006) High frequency tinnitus

Tomography Study. *International Tinnitus Journal*, 10, 2, 113-125.

function and during learning. *Physiological Review*. 82:601-636.

*Otolaryngology Clinics of North America* 36; 307–320.

frequency range. *Hearing Research*. Oct 1;269(1-2):95-101

treatment. *International Tinnitus Journal.* 2(2):137-142

system. *Internal Tinnitus Journal*.1(2):115-126.

reduces hearing loss and prevents cortical map reorganization. *Journal of* 

handicap questionnaire after cochlear implantation. *American Journal of Audiology*.

computational model for the development of neuronal hyperactivity. *Journal of* 

against tinnitus could be most effective when tinnitus pitch is within the stimulated

frequency acoustic stimulation and tinnitus control: A Positron Emission

Theoretical and Clinical Implications of Neuroanatomical Substrates. *International* 

aids on tinnitus. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. Jul-

silence on tinnitus perception. *Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgury.* Jan;132(1):20-

High-Frequency Spectrum Tinnitus Therapy. *International Tinnitus Journal.*

without hearing loss does not mean absence of deafferentation, *Hearing Rese*arch

extralemniscal auditory pathway. *Laryngoscope*, 102,10, 1165-1171.

*Neuroscience*, Jan, 25(3):699-705

*Neurophysiology*. Jun;101(6):3042-52

*Tinnitus Journal*. 15(1):5-50.

San Diego: Singular, 2000.

Aug;21(7):461-73.

14(2):108-11.

222:108-114

4.

Dec;18(2):144-51.


Eggermont JJ & Roberts LE. (2004). The neuroscience of tinnitus. *Trends in Neuroscience*.

Erlandsson SI, Hallberg LR, Axelsson A. (1992). Psychological and audiological correlates of

Fausti SA, Wilmington DJ, Gallun FJ, Myers PJ, Henry JA. (2009) Auditory and vestibular

Goldstein, B., Shulman, A., Lenhardt, M.L., Richards D.G., Madsen, A., Guinta, R. (2001).

Goldstein BA, Lenhardt M.L. Shulman, A. (2005). Tinnitus improvement with ultra high frequency vibration therapy*. International Tinnitus Journal,* 11,1,14-22. Goldsteim BA, Shulman A Lenhardt ML (2005). Ultrahigh frequency ultrasonic external

Hakansson B, Tjellstrom A, Rosenhall U. (1985). Acceleration levels at hearing threshold

Heffner HE & Heffner RS. (1986). Hearing loss in Japanese macaques following bilateral

Heffner HE & Heffner RS. (1995) Conditioned avoidance. in Methods in Comparative Psychoacoustics (eds. Klump, G.M. et al.) 79-94 Basel: Birkhauser Verlag. Heller MF. & Bergman M. Tinnitus aurium in normally hearing persons.(1953) *Annals of* 

Kitajima K, Kitahara M, Kodama A. Can tinnitus be masked by band erased filtered masker?

Knobel K.& Sanchez TG. Influence of silence and attention on tinnitus perception.(2008).

Lanting CP, de Kleine E, van Dijk P. (2009). Neural activity underlying tinnitus generation:

LeDoux JE (1990). Information flow from sensation to emotion plasticity in the neural

Lenhardt ML. (2003). Ultrasonic Hearing in Humans: Applications for Tinnitus Treatment.

Meikle MB, Edlefsen LL, Lay JW. (1999). Suppression of tinnitus by bone conduction of

Moffat G, Adjout K, Gallego S, Thai-Van H, Collet L, Noreña AJ. (2009). Effects of hearing

results from PET and fMRI. Hearing Research. Sep;255(1-2):1-13.

Masking tinnitus with sounds not covering the tinnitus frequency.(1987). *American* 

computation of stimulus value. IN M. Gabriel & J. Moore (Eds). "Learning and Computational Neuroscience: Foundations of adaptive networks" (pp3-52).

ultrasound. Paper presented at the *Twenty-First Annual Meeting of the Association for* 

aid fitting on the perceptual characteristics of tinnitus. *Hearing Research*. Aug;254(1-

auditory cortex lesions. *Journal of Neurophysiology*, 55, 256-271.

dysfunction associated with blast-related traumatic brain injury. *Journal* 

Long-term Inhibition of Tinnitus by UltraQuiet™ Therapy: Preliminary Report.

acoustic stimulation for tinnitus relief: a method for patient selection, International

with direct bone conduction vs. conventional bone conduction. *Acta* 

perceived tinnitus severity. *Audiology.* 31(3):168-79.

*Rehabilitation Research Development*. 46(6):797-810.

*International Tinnitus Journal*, 7, 2, 122-127.

*Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology* 62:73– 83.

Cambridge, MA; Bradford Books; MIT Press.

*International Tinnitus Journal.* 9(2):69-75

*Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery*. Jan;138(1):18-22.

*Research in Otolaryngology,*St. Petersburg Beach, FL, USA

*Tinnitus Journal*. 11(2): 111-114.

*Otolaryngologia*;100:240-252.

*Journal of Otology* 8:203-6.

2):82-91.

27:676-682


**Bhramari Pranayama and Alternative** 

*Trinidad and Tobago Association for the Hearing Impaired, DRETCHI* 

TINNITUS - a symptom which can have a range of adverse effects for a significant number of people with the result of detrimental impacts on their quality of life. However, tinnitus

This chapter is intended to introduce a novel approach to the management of tinnitus using Bhramari Pranayama (BP). Minimal information on alternative clinical management is provided. The chapter addresses treatment options for patients with tinnitus including pharmachological treatment, surgery, electrical stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, masking therapy, hearing aids, ultra high frequency vibration therapy, Neuromonics tinnitus treatment, sound stimulation therapy during sleep, tinnitus retraining therapy, cognitive behavioural therapy, virtual reality therapy, biofeedback therapy, neurofeedback therapy, as well as research leading to tinnitus management and

Although there is no cure for tinnitus, research from around the world probes tinnitus's potential therapies. The intensive work in applying the principles of Bhramari Pranayama is explaining successful tinnitus management (Pandey et al., 2010). The primary goal of this chapter is to provide a therapeutic approach (Bhramari Pranayama) for tinnitus sufferers by helping them overcome the loudness of tinnitus, the psychosocial (inability to participate in leisure activity and work, difficulty in concentration, depression) and also the physical (sleep disturbance, muscle tension) consequences of tinnitus. It is important to note that Bhramari Pranayama can be used in patients with a high degree of severity of tinnitus whereas other therapeutic approaches like masking therapy or sound therapy may not be appropriate in the same conditions. The application of the Bhramari Pranayama concept helps the sufferer to design and implement a program to manage their tinnitus and associated difficulties. The concepts of the limbic system and neural plasticity are also

addressed, taking into consideration their association with Bhramari Pranayama.

There are three main components of tinnitus which interact with and influence each other. The first being the *acoustic* component, which is perceived most commonly as an undesirable continuous, high pitched ringing sound. The second aspect of tinnitus is the *attentional* component, and this refers to the degree to which the afflicted person listens to or

remains poorly understood and there is no uniformly effective therapy.

**1. Introduction** 

recommendations for future research.

**Treatments of Tinnitus:** 

**In Pursuit of the Cure** 

Sidheshwar Pandey

*Trinidad and Tobago,* 

*West Indies* 

www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/default.htm

