J R Soc Med 2003;96:582-585
doi:10.1258/jrsm.96.12.582
© 2003 Royal Society of Medicine
Hyperacusis
David M Baguley MSc MBA
Audiology (94), Addenbrooke's Hospital, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 2QQ,
UK
E-mail:
dmb29{at}cam.ac.uk
 |
INTRODUCTION
|
|---|
Disorders of loudness perception, for long a clinical enigma,
can represent
a serious challenge to the patient. In this paper
I review what is known of
hyperacusisthe mechanisms and
approaches to treatment. I begin with
definitions, because even
basic terminology still varies in this
under-researched area.
Hyperacusis has been defined as 'unusual tolerance to
ordinary environmental
sounds'1 and,
more pejoratively, as 'consistently exaggerated or inappropriate
responses to sounds that are neither threatening nor uncomfortably loud to a
typical
person'.2
Common to both is the implication that the experience can be evoked by sounds
of low intensity and that sounds in general, rather than specific sounds, are
problematic. This is less true of phonophobia (fear of sound) and the
recently proposed misophonia (dislike of
sound),3 both of
which carry a suggestion that the intolerance may be specific to certain
sounds with emotional associations. In neurology, phonophobia tends to be used
specifically for the loudness intolerance reported by some patients with
migraine.4 For the
wider types of hearing hypersensitivity, therefore, the term hyperacusis is
preferable. Loudness
recruitment5,6
describes an experience commonly associated with cochlear hearing loss and
specifically with dysfunction of the outer hair cells of the organ of Corti:
with a rising sound level, the perceived loudness increases faster than
normal.6 This
phenomenon may be distinguished from hyperacusis if the individual perceives
sound of moderate intensity as uncommonly loud (recruitment) or sound of low
intensity as uncomfortably loud (hyperacusis) but the two experiences are not
mutually exclusive. Loudness recruitment does not, however, vary with
mood.
 |
PREVALENCE, INCIDENCE AND QUANTIFICATION OF HANDICAP
|
|---|
Lack of robust epidemiological data is a major shortcoming of
the published
work on hyperacusis. Fabijanska
et
al.7 undertook
a
postal questionnaire of tinnitus in Poland which included an
unspecified
question on hyperacusis. Of the 10 349 respondents,
15.2% reported hyperacusis
(12.5% of males, 17.6% of females).
Regional differences were also reported. A
weakness of this
report is the lack of specificity.
More recently Andersson and
co-workers8
investigated the prevalence of hyperacusis in the adult Swedish population.
Two methods were usedan internet study, wherein visitors to the website
of a Swedish broadsheet newspaper were invited to complete a web-based
questionnaire; and a postal population study. Of 1167 individuals who clicked
upon the web banner 595 responded, a response rate of 52%. The point
prevalence of hyperacusis in this group was 9%. The postal group comprised 987
individuals of whom 589 responded (response rate 60%) and the point prevalence
was 8%. Participants were not asked if they had ever sought a medical opinion
regarding their hyperacusis. Incidence data for hyperacusis do not seem to
have been reported anywhere.
A coincidence of tinnitus complaint and of experiences of hyperacusis has
been widely noted. Among patients attending tinnitus clinics with a primary
complaint of tinnitus the prevalence of hyperacusis is about
40%;9-11
and in patients with a primary complaint of hyperacusis the prevalence of
tinnitus has been reported as
86%.12 The apparent
link has led to speculation about common
mechanisms.13
Until recently it has not been possible to quantify the handicap associated
with hyperacusis, but two instruments have now been published for this
purpose. Khalfa et
al.14 describe
data from a self-report hyperacusis questionnaire with 14 items
'normalized' on 201 individuals who had answered a recruitment
advertisement. Principal component analysis indicated that three factors
accounted for 48% of the varianceattentional, social and emotional.
With a 27-item questionnaire examined in 226 patients with hyperacusis Nelting
et al.15
reached similar conclusions: 51% of the variance was accounted for by
cognitive reactions, actional/somatic behaviour and emotional factors. This
latter questionnaire is at present available only in German and neither has
been shown to be sensitive to treatment effects, but such instruments do
represent a step forward.
 |
AETIOLOGIES
|
|---|
In the great majority of cases, no underlying medical condition
can be
found. The conditions in which hyperacusis has been reported
as a symptom have
been reviewed by Katzenell and
Segal,
16 and
those
identified are listed in
Box 1.
It should be noted, however,
that of the peripheral conditions identified,
several involve
facial nerve dysfunction. Since the facial nerve innervates
the
stapedial reflex, which is a mechanism for reducing the perceived
intensity
of impulse sound, these conditions may reduce the efficacy of
that
reflex and hence increase the perceived intensity of sound.
As such this does
not meet a strict definition of hyperacusis.
What of the central conditions? Lyme disease is a systemic infection with
the tick-borne spirochaeta Borrelia burgdorferi which targets
specific body organs including the peripheral and central nervous
systems.17 Some
caution must be exercised in interpreting reports of hyperacusis because
facial palsy can be a feature, hence stapedial reflex dysfunction as described
above. There are, however, reports of hyperacusis in Lyme disease without
facial nerve
dysfunction.18
Williams syndrome is a disorder characterized by deficits in conceptual
reasoning, problem solving, motor control, arithmetic ability and spatial
cognition,19 with
an incidence of 1 in 20 000 live births. As many as 90% of individuals with
this syndrome report
hyperacusis,2 and a
proposed mechanism is 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)
dysfunction20see
next section. Other conditions in which hyperacusis has been reported are
middle cerebral
aneurysm21 and
migrainous cerebral
infarction.22 A
case series of hyperacusis in multiple sclerosis has been
reported,23 though
the association is unusual.
Although most cases of hyperacusis are non-syndromici.e. do not
reflect an underlying medical disorder medical assessment is
desirable.
 |
MECHANISMS
|
|---|
Hyperacusis has several potential mechanisms which are not mutually
exclusive;
as with
tinnitus,
24 the
patient population is likely to be heterogeneous.
The high prevalence of
hyperacusis in Williams syndrome led
Marriage and
Barnes
20 to
consider the mechanism in that condition
and the extent to which it might be
generalized to other individuals.
Their suggestion that 5-HT might be
implicated was based partly
on the clinical observation that hyperacusis tends
to occur
in other conditions where 5-HT function is thought to be
disturbednamely,
migraine, depression and post-traumatic stress
disorder.
16,25
5-HT
does appear to have a role in modulating auditory gain and the
determination
of significance of
sound.
26,27
However, there is no evidence
that 5-HT disturbance contributes to hyperacusis
of non-syndromic
28
types.
Moreover, even in Williams syndrome the excessive auditory gain
may be
explained partly by the high incidence of otitis media
with effusion and the
associated conductive hearing loss.
Sahley and
Nodar29 considered
the observation that hyperacusis (and tinnitus) appear to increase in extent
at times of tiredness, anxiety or stress. They hypothesize that, during
stress, endogenous dynorphins are released into the synaptic region beneath
inner hair cells. This might potentiate the neurotransmitter glutamate,
causing sound to be perceived with excessive loudness. The model applies both
to externally generated and to internally generated (tinnitus) sound, but
empirical evidence in support has not yet been forthcoming.
Another potential mechanism is auditory efferent dysfunction. An auditory
efferent system is common to all mammals, and in humans consists of both a
lateral and a medial system. In the lateral system, whose function remains
unclear, the pathways originate around the lateral superior olive and
terminate on the primary afferent dendrite beneath the inner hair cell. In the
medial system they begin medially with the superior olivary complex and
terminate on the base of outer hair cells, and functions of the system appear
to include modulation of auditory
gain30 and the
behavioural response to sound (manifest in anatomical links with the reticular
formation). Medial auditory dysfunction might contribute to both hyperacusis
and tinnitus; thus, disturbance of the ability to modulate central gain might
result in persistent sensitivity despite exposure to noise of moderate to high
intensity. There is evidence against any such role, however, in that patients
who have undergone vestibular nerve section (usually for symptoms of vertigo
refractory to other treatments) do not complain of increased tinnitus or of
loudness
intolerance31 and
psychoacoustic testing of such patients reveals no decrement in auditory
performance.32
For patients, hypersensitivity of hearing may evoke anxiety and even fear.
This can be true for specific sounds or for sound in general. The links
between the central auditory system and areas of the brain implicated in
anxiety and fear are now under close scrutiny. Specifically, anatomical and
functional links between the central auditory system and the amygdalae have
been identified33
(the amygdalae being an essential element of fear
conditioning).34
Such processes have been described as integral to the development of
tinnitus-related distress, and also to the fear and anxiety component of
hyperacusis. In view of the evidence that the central auditory system has a
role in setting auditory gain, the possibility of some central
hyperexcitability should be considered. Jastreboff and
Hazell35 discussed
this as a potential mechanism for hyperacusis. The experience of hyperacusis
in patients with no apparent dysfunction or involvement of the peripheral
auditory apparatus is circumstantial evidence in favour of this mechanism.
Jastreboff and Hazell further speculate that such central hyperexcitability
(manifest as hyperacusis) may represent a precursive state of troublesome
tinnitus.
 |
THERAPY
|
|---|
For many patients, the first reaction to hyperacusis is to protect
themselves
with ear plugs, muffs or other devices. There is, however, reason
to
believe that such strategies to decrease the intensity of sound
entering
the auditory system may further increase the central
gain, exacerbating rather
than improving the hyperacusis. In
the past, patients had little choice but to
resort to hearing
protection devices since hyperacusis was not widely regarded
as
a genuine symptom. For tinnitus, tinnitus retraining therapy
(TRT) was
introduced in
1993,
35 and with
minor modifications
this has been advocated also for hyperacusis. After
audiological
and medical evaluation, the
protocol
11 requires
classification
of the patient according to the tinnitus and hyperacusis state,
and
then 'directive counselling' about the auditory system, about
mechanisms
of tinnitus and hyperacusis and about the distress associated
with
them. Binaural sound therapy, from ear-level wide-band
generators, is
undertaken even when the symptoms are unilateral.
Treatment is based on the
notion of desensitization, and the
sound intensity is increased from a low
level gradually over
time. No randomized controlled trials have been done on
retraining
therapy for hyperacusis; they would be hard to design in view
of
the twin elements of counselling and sound therapy. Several
observational
studies
36,37
have pointed to improvements in loudness
tolerance, but the nature of training
to do TRT (attendance
at an examined course run by the originators) raises
concerns
about objectivity. Nevertheless, the approach taken by TRT
practitionerspromoting
understanding and insight and the use of
low-level, non-threatening,
wide-band noiseseems based on common
sense.
For the psychological distress associated with tinnitus,
cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) has been identified as the treatment of
choice,38 and this
seems a reasonable strategy to counter the anxiety and stress associated with
hyperacusis, together with information counselling, relaxation therapy and
sound therapy. No evidence as to the efficacy of such an approach is yet
available, and at present CBT therapists in the UK show little interest in
tinnitus or hyperacusis. There is at present some tension between advocates of
retraining therapy and advocates of psychological therapy, but the differences
between the two are not great. Patients would probably benefit if the insights
from both could be brought to bear.
 |
REFERENCES
|
|---|
- Vernon JA. Pathophysiology of tinnitus: a special
casehyperacusis and a proposed treatment. Am J
Otol 1987;8:201
-2[Medline]
- Klein AJ, Armstrong BL, Greer MK, Brown FR. Hyperacusis and otitis
media in individuals with Williams syndrome. J Speech Hear
Disord 1990;55:339
-4[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Jastreboff PJ. Tinnitus retraining treatment for patients with
tinnitus and decreased sound tolerance. Otolaryngol Clin N
Am 2003;36:2
- Silberstein SD, Saper JR, Freitag FG. Migraine: diagnosis and
treatment. In: Silberstein SD, Lipton RB, Dalessio DJ, eds. Wolff's
Headache and other Head Pain, 7th edn. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2001: 121-237
- Fowler EP. A method for the early detection of otosclerosis.
Arch Otolaryngol1936; 24:731
-41[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Moore ECJ. Cochlear Hearing Loss. London:
Whurr, 1998[Medline]
- Fabijanska A, Rogowski M, Bartnik G, Skarzynski H. Epidemiology of
tinnitus and hyperacusis in Poland. In: Hazell J W P, ed.
Proceedings of the Sixth International Tinnitus
Seminar. London: The Tinnitus and Hyperacusis Centre,1999
: 569-71
- Andersson G, Lindvall N, Hursti T, Carlbring P. Hypersensitivity to
sound (hyperacusis): a prevalence study conducted via the Internet and post.
Int J Audiol2002; 41:545
-54[Medline]
- Sood SK, Coles RRA. Hyperacusis and phonophobia in tinnitus
patients. Br J Audiol1998; 22:228
- Bartnik G, Fabijanska A, Rogowski M. Our experience in treatment of
patients with tinnitus and/or hyperacusis using the habituation method. In:
Hazell J W P, ed. Proceedings of the Sixth International Tinnitus
Seminar. London: The Tinnitus and Hyperacusis Centre,1999
: 416-17
- Jastreboff PJ, Jastreboff MM. Tinnitus retraining therapy (TRT) as
a method for treatment of tinnitus and hyperacusis patients. J Am
Acad Audiol 2000;11:162
-77[Medline]
- Anari M, Axelsson A, Eliasson A, Magnusson L. Hypersensitivity to
sound. Questionnaire data, audiometry and classification. Scand
Audiol 1999;28:219
-30[Medline]
- Andersson G, Vretblad P, Larsen HC, Lyttkens L. Longitudinal
follow-up of tinnitus complaints. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck
Surg 2001;127:175
-9[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Khalfa S, Dubal S, Veuillet E, Perez-Seliaz F, Jouvent R, Collet L.
Psychometric normalisation of a hyperacusis questionnaire.
Otorhinolaryngology2002; 64:438
-42
- Nelting M, Rienhoff NK, Hesse G, Lamparter U. The assessment of
subjective distress related to hyperacusis with a self-rating questionnaire on
hypersensitivity to sound. Laryngorhinootologie2002; 81:32
-4
- Katzenell U, Segal S. Hyperacusis: review and clinical guidelines.
Otol Neurotol2001; 22:321
-6[Medline]
- Coyle PK, Schutzer SE. Neurological aspects of Lyme disease.
Med Clin N Am2002; 86:261
-84[Medline]
- Nields JA, Fallon BA, Jastreboff PJ. Carbamazepine in the treatment
of Lyme disease-induced hyperacusis. J Neuropsychiatry Clin
Neurosci 1999;11:97
-8[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Levitin DJ, Menon V, Schmitt JE, et al. Neural correlates
of auditory perception in Williams syndrome: an FMRI study.
Neuroimage2003; 18:74
-82[Medline]
- Marriage J, Barnes NM. Is central hyperacusis a symptom of 5
hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) dysfunction? J Laryngol Otol1995; 109:915
-21[Medline]
- Khalil S, Ogunyemi L, Osbourne J. Middle cerebral artery aneurysm
presenting as isolated hyperacusis. J Laryngol Otol2002; 116:376
-8[Medline]
- Lee H, Whitman GT, Lim JG, Yi SD, Cho YW, Ying S, Baloh RW. Hearing
symptoms in migraneous infarction. Arch Neurol2003; 60:113
-16[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Weber H, Pfadenhauer K, Stohr M, Rosler A. Central hyperacusis with
phonophobia in multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis2002; 8:505
-9[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Moller AR. Similarities between chronic pain and tinnitus.
Am J Otol1997; 18:577
-85[Medline]
- Westcott M. Case study: management of hyperacusis associated with
post-traumatic stress disorder. In: Patuzzi R, ed. Proceedings of
the Seventh International Tinnitus Seminar 2002. Perth:
University of Western Australia, 2002:280
-5
- Thompson GC, Thompson AM, Garrett KM, Britton BH. Serotonin and
serotonin receptors in the central auditory system. Otolaryngol
Head Neck Surg1994; 110:93
-102[Medline]
- Hurley LM, Thompson AM, Pollack GD. Serotonin in the inferior
colliculus. Hearing Res2002; 168:1
-11[Medline]
- Phillips DP, Carr MM. Disturbances of loudness perception.
J Am Acad Audiol1998; 9:371
-9[Medline]
- Sahley TL, Nodar RH. A biochemical model of peripheral tinnitus.
Hearing Res2001; 182:43
-54
- Sahley TL, Nodar RH, Musiek FE. Efferent Auditory
System: Structure and Function. San Diego: Singular,1997
- Baguley DM, Axon PR, Winter IM, Moffat DA. The effect of vestibular
nerve section upon tinnitus. Clin Otolaryngol2002; 27:219
-26[Medline]
- Scharf B, Magnan J, Chays A. On the role of the olivocochlear
bundle in hearing: 16 case studies. Hearing Res1997; 103:101
-22[Medline]
- Bhatnagar SC. Neuroscience for the Study of
Communicative Disorders. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Williams &
Wilkins, 2002
- Kandel ER, Kupfermann I, Iversen S. Learning and memory. In: Kandel
ER, Schwartz JH, Jessell TM eds. Principles of Neural
Science. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2000:1227
-46
- Jastreboff PJ, Hazell JWP. A neurophysiological approach to
tinnitus: clinical implications. Br J Audiol1993; 27:7
-17[Medline]
- Gold S, Formby C, Frederick EA, Suter C. Shifts in loudness
discomfort level in tinnitus patients with and without hyperacusis. In:
Patuzzi R, ed. Proceedings of the Seventh International Tinnitus
Seminar 2002. Perth: University of Western Australia,2002
: 170-2
- Hazell JWP, Sheldrake JB, Graham RL. Decreased sound tolerance:
predisposing factors, triggers and outcomes after TRT. In: Patuzzi R, ed.
Proceedings of the Seventh International Tinnitus Seminar
2002. Perth: University of Western Australia, 2002:255
-61
- Andersson G, Lyttkens L. A metanalystic review of psychological
treatments for tinnitus. Br J Audiol1999; 24:201
-10

CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?