Fig 1.
Left: CONSORT 2010 Flow Diagram, right: schematic overview of the used study design indicating the preliminary work (I) which is published elsewhere [10] and the current follow-up study (II). CI: cochlear implant; TI: tinnitus implant.
Table 1.
Subject-specific stimulation during TI-use.
Charge-balanced biphasic stimulation in monopolar mode.
Table 2.
Differences between TI and CI, investigated in a crossover design.
Fig 2.
The averaged score on a Visual Analogue Scale (0–10) on perceived tinnitus loudness, amount of discomfort, effect on life and extent of problems due to the tinnitus.
Individual results and median are shown at baseline, after one week of sham stimulation and at the end of the follow-up.
Fig 3.
Tinnitus loudness matched via the contralateral normal hearing ear at baseline, after one week of sham stimulation and at the end of the follow-up.
Individual results and median are shown.
Fig 4.
Subject-specific results of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (left graph) and Tinnitus Questionnaire (right graph) at baseline, after one week of sham stimulation and at the end of the follow-up.
Fig 5.
Subject-specific Residual Inhibition (left graph), tinnitus pitch (middle graph) and type of tinnitus perception (right graph) during the crossover design and the three-month follow-up period during modality-use of patient’s choice.
The Y-axis represents the individual subjects. The percentages of the types of tinnitus perceptions were color-coded in the individual pie charts; black for pure tones, grey of narrow band noises and white for white noise.
Table 3.
Depression and utility scores.