Porubsky
There was no difference in the outcome from the treatment of tinnitus with two different hyperbaric oxygen regimens.
|
Clinical Bottom Line: 1. No difference in outcome between the two HBOT groups |
Citation/s: 1. Porubsky, C., Stiegler, P., Matzi, V., Lipp, C., Kontaxis, A., Klemen, H., Smolle-Jüttner, F. Hyperbaric oxygen in tinnitus: Influence of psychological factors on treatment results? ORL : Journal for Oto - Rhino - Laryngology and its Related Specialties,2007; 69(2):107-12.
Lead author's name and fax:Christian Porubsky: christian.porubsky@klinikum-graz.at
Three-part Clinical Question:For patients with tinnitus, does HBOT at 2.2 ATA for 60 mins daily for 15 days compared to a 2.5 ATA treatment on the same schedule result in any greater resolution of symptoms?
Search Terms: tinnitus, hearing loss, retraining
The Study:Non-blinded randomised controlled trial with intention-to-treat.
The Study Patients: Patients presenting for the treatment of tinnitus (time from onset from < 2 wks to > 1 year).
Control group (N = 180; 180 analysed): 100% oxygen breathing at 2.2 ATA for 60 minutes daily for 15 working days.
Experimental group (N = 180; 180 analysed): As above but at 2.5 ATA.
The Evidence:
Outcome |
Time to Outcome |
HBOT 2.2 ATA |
HBOT 2.4 ATA |
Relative Risk Reduction |
Absolute Risk Reduction |
NNT |
|
Complete or partial relief |
1 month |
0.50 |
0.49 |
2% |
0.01 |
91 |
95% CIs: |
-18% to 23% |
-0.09 to 0.11 |
NNT = 9 to INF; NNH = 11 to INF | |||
|
No change in symptoms |
1 month |
0.50 |
0.51 |
-2% |
-0.01 |
-91 |
95% CIs: |
-23% to 18% |
-0.11 to 0.09 |
NNT = 11 to INF; NNH = 9 to INF | |||
Comments:
1. The authors were primarily interested in the effect of pre-treatment expectations on resolution of symptoms and the RCT aspect was a relatively minor aim.
2. I have assumed '2.2 bar' here was in fact 2.2 ATA.
3. Pre-treatment expectations influenced the chance of improvement (positive expectation 60.3% improved; negative expectation 19% improved. P < 0.05).
4. Time to HBOT did not have any statistically significant influence on outcome.
5. On non-random analysis the authors concluded HBOT was not better than placebo treatment results.
Appraised by:Mike Bennett m.bennett@unsw.edu.au ; Tuesday, 3 January 2023
Kill or Update By: January 2030
