Final published version
Licence: Unspecified
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Management of tinnitus in English NHS audiology departments
T2 - An evaluation of current practice
AU - Hoare, Derek J.
AU - Gander, Phillip E.
AU - Collins, Luke
AU - Smith, Sandra
AU - Hall, Deborah A.
N1 - Re‐use of this article is permitted in accordance with the Terms and Conditions set out at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/onlineopen#OnlineOpen_Terms
PY - 2012/4
Y1 - 2012/4
N2 - Rationale, aim and objective In 2009, the UK Department of Health formalized recommended National Health Service practices for the management of tinnitus from primary care onwards. It is timely therefore to evaluate the perceived practicality, utility and impact of those guidelines in the context of current practice. Methods We surveyed current practice by posting a 36-item questionnaire to all audiology and hearing therapy staff that we were able to identify as being involved in tinnitus patient care in England. Results In total, 138 out of 351 clinicians responded (39% response rate). The findings indicate a consensus opinion that management should be tailored to individual symptom profiles but that there is little standardization of assessment procedures or tools in use. Conclusions While the lack of standardized practice might provide flexibility to meet local demand, it has drawbacks. It makes it difficult to ascertain key standards of best practice, it complicates the process of clinical audit, it implies unequal patient access to care, and it limits the implementation of translational research outcomes. We recommend that core elements of practice should be standardized, including use of a validated tinnitus questionnaires and an agreed pathway for decision making to better understand the rationale for management strategies offered.
AB - Rationale, aim and objective In 2009, the UK Department of Health formalized recommended National Health Service practices for the management of tinnitus from primary care onwards. It is timely therefore to evaluate the perceived practicality, utility and impact of those guidelines in the context of current practice. Methods We surveyed current practice by posting a 36-item questionnaire to all audiology and hearing therapy staff that we were able to identify as being involved in tinnitus patient care in England. Results In total, 138 out of 351 clinicians responded (39% response rate). The findings indicate a consensus opinion that management should be tailored to individual symptom profiles but that there is little standardization of assessment procedures or tools in use. Conclusions While the lack of standardized practice might provide flexibility to meet local demand, it has drawbacks. It makes it difficult to ascertain key standards of best practice, it complicates the process of clinical audit, it implies unequal patient access to care, and it limits the implementation of translational research outcomes. We recommend that core elements of practice should be standardized, including use of a validated tinnitus questionnaires and an agreed pathway for decision making to better understand the rationale for management strategies offered.
KW - good practice guidelines
KW - hearing therapist
KW - outcome measure
U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01566.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01566.x
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 21087449
AN - SCOPUS:84863295398
VL - 18
SP - 326
EP - 334
JO - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
JF - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
SN - 1356-1294
IS - 2
ER -