ANA Discussion Forum
General Category => Hearing Issues => Topic started by: mk on October 05, 2008, 07:57:56 pm
-
Last week I had a second episode of sudden hearing loss. My first one was prior to my GK treatment. I felt a sudden onset of fullness in the hear, tinitus and hearing went pretty much down to nothing. I flunked the hearing test and my ENT started me on a megadose of prednisone (40 mgs) right away. After 4 days I think I have regained quite a bit of hearing and fullness is almost gone. Can't say the same for tinnitus, it is like I have an orchestra playing in my ear.
I have seen in older posts that quite a few people have experienced sudden hearing loss before treatment or after radiation and I understand that hearing may or may not come back afterwards. Any recent experiences with that, anyone?
Obviously the hearing loss must be due to swelling, but is this the kind of swelling that shows on the MRI? I don't have any other symptoms or issues that would indicate significant swelling. I remember Tumbleweed mentioned once something about swelling that shows up on the MRI, versus "internal" swelling?
I guess I will figure this out on my upcoming 6-month MRI on Friday - I am so anxious about it.
Marianna
-
I can sure understand the anxiety; sudden hearing loss is very upsetting. Hearing is sensitive enough that just a little swelling in just the right place is enough to seriously interfere with it, so it may or may not show up on the MRI. I think JB had some hearing fluctuation that finally settled down, and I'm sure others have, although nothing recent comes to mind.
If you and your ENT can stay on top of it, hopefully you will experience only temporary losses, and your hearing will stabilize in a few more months. Best wishes for that MRI on Friday.
Steve
-
I remember Tumbleweed mentioned once something about swelling that shows up on the MRI, versus "internal" swelling?
Marianna
Yes, Dr. Chang told me that some swelling is internal and doesn't show up on an MRI, although it does present symptoms.
I'm glad your doctor gave you steroids right away. Dr. Brackmann told me that it completely restores hearing in 50% of the cases in which steroids are administered within 24 hours after the onset of the hearing-loss episode.
Good luck with your followup MRI this Friday, Marianna! Please let us know the results when you find out.
Best wishes,
Tumbleweed
-
Hey Marianna,
At approx 4-6 mos post CK, I had a temporary onset of hearing loss (approx 10-15 db) due to swelling. Dr's noted to me to try antihistimines and OTC anti-inflammatories and for me, it helped. Hearing issues calmed down after that. I have heard of this same issue from other radio-patients (here and on the CK Patient Support board) and hope that your situation is much like mine....esp. since you are in the "timeframe" for these things to crop up. That it will resolve soon and no more worries. Please keep us updated and please hang tough!
Phyl
-
Thank you all for your input.
It seems that prednisone did its job once more. Hearing has cleared almost entirely, although I am pretty sure that some frequencies come distorted.
After my first episode of hearing loss it came completely back, and tinnitus was gone after two weeks of taking prednisone. I hope this will be the case this time around.
I will keep you posted about my MRI results.
Marianna
-
Hi Marianna - I was just seeing your post - sorry you've been having problems. Have things stabilized at all? I know we've talked before, but your episodes sure sound like what I experienced. When do you have your MRI and/or hearing test? I'll be thinking of you and sending a prayer. I am feeling just a little paranoid about that happening again to me, too, esp. now that I've completed GK. It seems to feel a little different everyday, doesn't it? Take care and keep us updated. ~ Joey
-
Thanks Joey for asking. Things are back to normal, had an ENT appointment today and hearing is back to where it was (i.e. 10-15 dB loss throughout the frequency range) with 100% speech discrimination. So prednisone worked wonders once again for me. This being the second time, I knew exactly what to expect. And given the sudden loss, this is obviously not due to radiation damage, but some swelling disrupting blood flow to the nerve.
I had my MRI last Friday (have posted on another thread, looks good to me!) and I am expecting my follow up appointment at the GK centre on October 28th. Overall I feel well, and quite optimistic.
Take care,
Marianna
-
The swelling issue is what has me so worried. I'm in W&W and the swelling around the tumor really affected my hearing 2 weeks ago and I was experiencing hyperacusus. Went on steroids and it was relieved almost immediately and my hearing came back fully. Now, I'm off of them and as I was decreasing the dosage the last few days, I've noticed the heightened sensitivity to hearing like before. The Doc says that steroids are not good L-T. So, I'm going to try OTC right now to see what happens. However, if I have radiation, and there is swelling, does the swelling last for months, years? I suppose this is what I need to ask the specialists when they call. I really worry about this if steroids can't be L-T.
Tisha
-
Hi Tisha,
I have been wondering my self how long the effect of the steroids will last and what to do if I continue having these episodes.
I had my first hearing loss last December, prior to GK. After taking prednisone my hearing was fully restored, and it lasted like this until October when I had my second episode. So there were quite a few months in-between where I was steroid-free.
With regards to swelling, this is not the kind of "external" swelling that you can tell from the MRI (and I am sure about this, because I had my 6 month post-GK MRI a couple of weeks after the hearing loss - there where no signs of swelling). It is more like "internal" swelling, which exerts some pressure on the blood vessels feeding the nerve and it sounds like it must be temporary since it can be resolved with steroids.
There are tons of posts on the other (more worrysome) type of swelling that can be seen on the MRI. And it is important to consult with the doctors about that, ie. if they feel that swelling could potentially cause major problems due to proximity to the brain stem etc.
With radiation you really need to take it one day at a time and hope for the best. Usually most of the side effects and symptoms do resolve over time.
Marianna
-
if I have radiation, and there is swelling, does the swelling last for months, years?
Tisha
There was a post about a year ago that included a graph that showed the statistical possibility of swelling post-radiosurgery, but I'm not sure how to find it anymore.
From what I remember, statistics showed that swelling, if it occurs at all, can last for many months and possibly more than a year. It's hard to say exactly how long swelling lasts in any one patient, because it can occur in between serial MRIs. If, for example, an MRI 6 months post-treatment shows no swelling but a followup MRI at 12 months does show swelling, did the swelling begin at month 7, 8, 9, 10 or 11?
The degree of swelling also varies from patient to patient. Some patients have no swelling, others may have mild swelling, while still others (a minority) may see their tumor swell to twice its former size or more.
Best,
Tumbleweed
-
There was a post about a year ago that included a graph that showed the statistical possibility of swelling post-radiosurgery, but I'm not sure how to find it anymore.
It was probably this one, posted by JB. "Swellers on the left, non-swellers on the right." It is one of my favorites, along with his MRI pics. :)
http://anausa.org/forum/index.php?topic=6493.msg63049#msg63049
Steve
-
Hi!
Maybe this is off subject. I am only three weeks two days post GK. I took steroids last week for perhaps some slight swelling. When I finished the steroids, I thought I was having some hearing issues so went to the doc today for a hearing test that came back the same as before GK....no hearing loss. I was pretty elated when I found out I had no hearing loss that I might have gotten confused with what the doctor said. I think he said if you have any permanent hearing loss it will come up later down the road....not immediately after GK. Can anyone clear this up? My doc said he only knows of one case with GK where a woman had some permanent hearing loss immediately after GK.....I'm not sure what he meant by immediately. Thanks.
Nancy
-
Nancy,
it is correct that hearing loss post radiation occurs over time, and can be gradual over the course of years. I have never heard about hearing loss happening immediately after treatment. My understanding is that the more hearing you have going into the treatment, the more likely you are to retain some, or most of it. I also understand that 6 months is the magical number for pretty much everything, that's why they schedule hearing tests at 6 months post radiation.
I also wanted to add that although my hearing is intact on my AN ear, I do believe I have some "distortion" at some frequencies, which sometimes is obvious in very noisy environments (like my classroom for example!). This can sometimes fool you into thinking that you have hearing issues.
Marianna
-
Hi mk,
Your post was very helpful. I think what you said about hearing loss happening gradually over time is what the doctor said to me. Thanks for clarifying because I was so happy that I hadn't lost any hearing that I wasn't really paying much attention to him. Only when I got home did I remember him saying something about we will be able to see what happens when you have your 6 months MRI and hearing test.
I have a difficult time hearing in crowds and with background noise. My AN doc said the only way to check hearing is in the hearing booth so being out in the "real world" is a totally different experience with hearing issues.
Thanks for your reply. Really cleared up things for me. I have pretty decent hearing, and I hope there will be no changes down the road.
Nancy
-
According to the research I read when I was first diagnosed, hearing loss can happen several years after treatment with GK (or CK). It usually doesn't occur immediately after being treated.
Marianna, a couple years ago I had distortion in my AN-side ear that lasted a couple months. It resolved itself completely (although my hearing worsened a bit) and didn't bother me for a couple years, but has come back ever so slightly in the last week or two. My point is that there is hope that the distortion you're hearing may resolve itself, if only temporarily but for a nevertheless quite extended period of time.
Best wishes,
Tumbleweed
-
Tumbleweed,
Do you remember any more details about hearing loss occuring several years after CK? I wonder how many people this has happened to. That is worrisome.
Tisha
-
From the research studies that I have read it is hard to pinpoint exactly, because there are many criteria in various studies and the different definitions of serviceable hearing etc. For example you may have some loss in db, but still retain serviceable hearing (which is the most desirable), in terms of voice recognition. Or the opposite, you might lose voice recognition but still be able to hear.
My ENT seems to think that as long as voice recognition is retained, any other reduction in intensity can be easily fixed with conventional hearing aids.
There are two type of hearing loss: Gradual loss, which is due to long term damage to the nerve that can happen over the course of years. It is irreversible, and nothing can be done about it, but the good news is that it can usually stabilize to some level (hopefully still serviceable). The more hearing you have going into treatment, the more likely it is that you can retain a level of serviceable hearing. People with severe loss prior to treatment are most likely to end up SSD.
The sudden loss which is due to swelling cutting off the blood supply to the nerve can be usually treated with steroids and can resolve if taken care of promptly.
Tumbleweed, regarding distortion I have had it for months, even prior to GK. It comes and goes (some days it is worse than others, especially if I am fighting a bug and then it disappears). To be honest, I don't really mind it in the grand scheme of things, I am so happy that I can still hear the way I do.
Marianna
-
Marianna,
You are an honorary AN doc in my opinion. All of that stuff you said about hearing is exactly what my doc said, and it was good to get a review. Thanks for your insight.
Nancy ;D
-
Wow thanks!
I guess I have been reading too much ;)
I totally understand how it feels to "be on guard" as you mentioned in another thread. I was like that for the first 3 months (my major concern was the possibility of serious swelling) - as I approached the 3 months and nothing bad happened, I started to be more confident and I kept telling myself that everything will be allright.
It was great that your hearing test was so good. Keep being positive! Even with a few bumps here and there, everything will turn out just fine.
Marianna
-
Tisha:
I remember a couple things. First of all, one of the neurosurgeons (who also does GK) I consulted prior to choosing Stanford for my treatment said that his research indicates that 40% of GK patients have their hearing preserved past the 6-year mark post-GK. The other 60% lose their hearing sometime during the six years post-GK. Paraphrasing what he told me, the curve on the graphs (showing those patients who suffer hearing loss after either surgery or GK) "catch up with each other" after about six years, thereby showing no long-term benefit with GK versus surgery for hearing preservation. HOWEVER... the literature this doctor gave me was rife with cheerleading comments for surgery and cited severely outdated data that was decades old, AND this particular doctor did way more surgeries than GK treatments (only about 6 per year for the latter). So, I personally found his perspective to be both biased and questionable.
The second thing I remember about the studies I read on hearing preservation with different treatments was that they weren't terribly specific with regard to exactly when within the study period (usually 5 or 6 years) each patient in the study groups lost their hearing. Any given patient cited in the studies may have lost their hearing in 1 year or in 6; the reports simply lumped everyone who lost their hearing -- regardless of how soon -- in the same category.
It's important to realize that some of the people who lost their hearing may have lost it for reasons other than GK or CK treatment: 1. very elderly patients may have lost their hearing due to normal aging or opportunistic infections, and 2.since radiosurgery doesn't kill a tumor immediately (necrosis can take many months to occur), the tumor itself may have destroyed the hearing nerve after treatment and before the tumor died.
Best wishes,
Tumbleweed
-
Just to add something else on the issue of statistics on GK: When looking at research studies it is very important to check what is the radiation dose they refer to. Generally research studies from the '90s referred to radiation doses of 14-16 Gy or even higher, which resulted in high rates of nerve damage. The standard doses nowadays are much lower, 12-13Gy or even lower. One more reason why it is very hard to draw any conclusions.
Marianna
-
The other 60% lose their hearing sometime during the six years post-GK... thereby showing no long-term benefit with GK versus surgery for hearing preservation.
I would argue that six years of hearing is better than none, and would count as a significant benefit to me.
In addition to the adjustment of the GK dose Marianna mentioned, and other refinements of the procedures, there has been a bias in patient selection over the years. In the days when they only did radiation on the elderly, the rate of hearing preservation would have been understandably lower than it is today.
That may swing the other way now. If radiation attracts a larger share of the small ANs with good useful hearing, it may show better statistics for that reason alone. It is actually quite difficult to control all the variables and get a true apples-to-apples comparison, since neither patients nor doctors want to do a true randomized study.
Steve
-
So much good info here. I remember the radiation oncologist and my AN doc saying the same thing about the lower radiation dose having a more positive outcome than when they used the higher doses in the earlier years of radiation treatment. My doc said they used 12 1/2 Gy on mine. My AN was really tiny, and I I had good hearing pre-GK. I have high hopes that I will continue to have good hearing down the road. I am totally impressed with all of the research you guys have done. I know you can find so much conflicting information, but what you are reporting here looks like very up to date research. Thanks. Nancy
-
Great posts, Marianna and Steve. To put this all in perspective, Dr. Chang said I had a 75% chance of preserving my hearing at the current level. Dr. Gibbs (my RO) said she expected my hearing function to "slightly diminish" over time following CK treatment. There are no hard and fast rules or ways to exactly predict outcome, but the bottom line is that results are improving as doses are lowered and execution is perfected.
The general consensus among those studying the most recent data is that rates of hearing preservation with CK and GK are at least as good as that achieved with surgical resection. For medium- and large-size tumors, radiosurgery usually offers a better chance of hearing preservation than does resection. In my case (medium-size tumor), I was told by all six of the doctors who gave me their consultations that resection offered a virtually 0% chance of preserving serviceable hearing. CK and GK outcomes were predicted to offer between 50% and 75% chance of hearing preservation at the current level (which is much greater than "serviceable hearing," as my hearing is still pretty good).
Best wishes,
Tumbleweed
-
Tumbleweed, MK and Nancy,
Thank you all so much for this information. What a tough decision to make, isn't it. It's such a risk to take. Do the radiation and chance of 20% deafness or watch and wait, and then one day wake up with my hearing gone. Mr. Medbury says I will lose my hearing if I do nothing. That's pretty blunt and staightforward. I'm heading down the path of radiation, but it's still scary.
What I'm researching now and trying to get my arms around, so if anyone can help me that's great. Dr. Change does 3 treatments I understand. JHH I believe does 5. Another poster had 5 done with CK because her Doc said there's a better chance of hearing preservation with 5. So, why do just 3 at Stanford. I wish I could get my hands on some published, peer reviewed studies of this. I think this will make my decision.
Tisha
-
Hi, Tisha:
I think you won't find any peer reviews that, as Steve put it, compares apples to apples regarding 3 vs 5 treatments, for example. Each doctor and facility has their own way of doing things. And ANs are so relatively rare that there simply isn't a one-size-fits-all, standardized treatment protocol or the patient-history data to irrefutably suggest one protocol over all the others.
Rather than try to find consensus (which doesn't exist) on what specific treatment protocol is most effective and safest, I respectfully suggest you simply search for the doctors with the most experience and greatest success record with treating ANs. It's a tall order to expect we laypersons can decide whether 3 or 5 RS treatments are the best for us, especially when our particular tumor size and location may suggest to an expert a different protocol than what any one study may generally conclude is best.
It's great that you are narrowing down your choices and starting to get a gut feeling about your general treatment preference (radiosurgery vs resection). I also think it's important to make a personal decision as to whether you're more comfortable with CK, GK or standard FSR. But once you decide which type of treatment is best for you, I suggest you just choose the medical facility and doctors you have the most confidence in and leave the details of the treatment up to them. Sure, ask them a ton of questions about how they plan to treat you and why. That'll let you know what to expect and make you more comfortable with the treatment process. But at some point, you're just going to have to trust that they know what they're doing, surrender, and place yourself in their care.
For example, I was very concerned that radiosurgery would destroy my hearing on the AN side. I felt that CK had the best track record of preserving hearing, so I was sold on CK. I was also the most impressed with Stanford and Dr. Chang. When I asked Dr. Chang why he didn't split up the treatments into more than 3 doses, he replied that he observed no benefit to fractionating any more than to 3 treatments. I wasn't about to steer away from Dr. Chang and Stanford (my first choices in my selection process) just because of some theory about more fractionation being better. I wanted to know why Dr. Chang only does 3 CK treatments and not 4 or 5 or more. But once he told me his reason, I decided to just trust him. It's no use second-guessing a guy who did around 700 successful AN treatments last year alone. That kind of experience is what matters most to me. Practice makes perfect. I had to just surrender to his direction and trust he knew what he was doing.
Considering that all treatments for ANs carry risk, I know the surrendering part is the hard part. All "posties" have been through that rough process. Just know it gets easier. You're doing a great job in weighing your options. You'll make the right choice and it will turn out okay.
Best wishes,
Tumbleweed
-
Tumbleweed,
I have read and reread this post about a dozen times, because of my struggle with the 3 vs. 5 treatments at Stanford. I've been trying to reach them by phone and e-mail, but nobody has responded. I think they might be out this week. Your post makes so much sense as far as experience. I had some follow up questions for Dr. Chang, the difference in number of treatments being the most important. I was hoping to get them answered this week, but i"m sure the holidays is pushing things back for them. If his response gives me the same level of comfort as it did you, then I'm ready to proceed and give them my insurance card to get the ball rolling. It really is nice to know that I've settled on a treatment (CK), I just have to have that final gut feeling resolved.
Anyway, thank you for this post, it has helped me put things into perspective. For some reason the swelling is down the last few days so I'm hearing well. Sometimes, even though it's a nice reprieve from the distortion, it makes me frightened to think I might lose it forever. I guess I'm having one of those sudden "panic" moments that hits every so often. I can actually hear the music from the radio today. How nice.
Tisha
-
Hi Tisha,
You remind me so much of myself as I was trying to make my decision. I am sure many folks can relate to your struggle as well. I think I was convinced early on that I wanted to have GK, but I felt the need to check out every little fact and statistic. My main worry was about the head frame, and it took a visit to the gamma knife center to talk to the nurse in detail about the whole procedure. She let me put the head frame on, and I walked around the room looking at the gamma knife machine from all different angles. It was just something I had to do, and it helped me get to my gut feeling..
It sounds totally reasonable that you would want to ask Dr. Chang more questions before making that final gut decision. It is good that you have already made the choice to have CK....one less thing to worry about. Now it is just down to the final few touches on getting what you need to make it a done deal. It sounds like Dr. Chang is a really good doc so I am sure you are in good hands. And, as for panic attacks, those are "normal", I think, for most people. I am a little over a month out from GK, and I am doing really well and sometimes I forget that I even had GK. Then when I realize how good I am doing, I will have a slight panic attack because it all seems to be to good to be true. All that worry for nothing it seems. Of course, with radiation we do have to play the waiting game, but I think radiation is a very good choice.
Hang in there. You will make it through it, and it won't be long before you have it behind you and life will go on.
Nancy
-
It's no use second-guessing a guy who did around 700 successful AN treatments last year alone. Tumbleweed
Oops! I just reread this and have to correct myself: Dr. Chang had treated about 700 ANs in total as of about 11 months ago. He treated about 125 ANs in 2007 alone.
That's what I get for posting so late at night when my brain isn't firing on all 8 cylinders. :)
Anyway, Dr. Chang has a ton of experience treating ANs.
Tisha, I think it's good that you're waiting to get that "gut feeling." It will come. In a medical situation like this, where there are no guarantees, you need time to process all your options and come to peace with a decision. You're on the right path and approaching the right destination for you.
Best wishes,
Tumbleweed
-
I has GK on Oct. 21st. I have noticed that the hearing in my nonAN ear is super sensitive now. The hearing is so magnified at times that it makes me dizzy or overwhelmed, especially in a crowd or with background noise. I recently had lunch with two AN friends with SSD. I was sitting in the middle since I have pretty good hearing in both ears. One (ColoradoGal) has hearing in her right ear, and the other (Kathleen) has hearing in her left ear. So, a good seating arrangement so to speak!!! It seemed to me that their hearing was better than mine (maybe I should have asked). I was wondering if their nonAN ear has learned to compensate for the SSD in their AN ear. Before GK, the hearing in my AN ear was better than my nonAN ear. I feel like the volume is the same in my AN ear, but word discrimination at this point seems to be a bit off. It's like my AN ear is no longer my "good" ear. Maybe my ears are trying to battle it out!!! Hopefully things will settle down soon and my ears will make peace with each other. Any ideas? Thanks. Nancy
-
Hi Nancy,
I have gone through stages where hearing on the AN side seemed a bit "distorted". This made me feel "strange" in very noisy environments (for example very noisy classrooms). Very hard to describe the sensation though, just an odd feeling like being dizzy as you mentioned. I don't know if this is what you are experiencing. This sensation has disappeared recently though.
Marianna
-
It's like my AN ear is no longer my "good" ear. Maybe my ears are trying to battle it out!!!
That makes sense to me, you would be very lucky if the AN did nothing at all to your AN ear. I had more loss in my AN ear before treatment, but my right side was also down some at higher frequencies. With my hearing aid, I hear high frequency better in the left ear, and lower tones better in the right ear. The AN ear is also less clear for word recognition overall, but picks up more of the "s" and "k" sounds that you need for some words. So it was confusing at first, but I have gotten pretty used to it.
Steve
-
Hi Nancy,
I have gone through stages where hearing on the AN side seemed a bit "distorted". This made me feel "strange" in very noisy environments...This sensation has disappeared recently though.
Marianna
Over Thanksgiving holiday, I had hyperacusis for 4 or 5 days, but large doses of vitamin E seem to have cleared it up. I also lost a little bit of hearing, but I think I got about 75% of that recent loss back. I attribute the rebound to the vitamin E as well, but perhaps it would've rebounded on its own without the vitamin E. I'm currently taking 1200 IU daily, split up into 3 doses (taken before meals and at bedtime). I'll soon cut the dose down a bit, but want to give it more time at high strength to see if I can increase the benefit.
During my short-lived hyperacusis phase, sound at certain frequencies sounded very sharp and resonant (painfully so). I hope that doesn't return! Years ago, I also had downright distortion in the same ear, but it was self-limiting (correcting itself after a week or two).
Hopefully all of these hearing abberations will be short-lived. I don't expect to get hearing acuity completely back, however. Bummer. :(
Best wishes to all,
Tumbleweed
-
Tumbleweed,
Did the slight loss in hearing just happen recently with the hyperacussis? When I had it, it came back perfectly with steroids. I would call to try that. They hyperacusis is bizarre...rattling of the paper, ice cubes in the glass. VEry loud and a certain sense of pain. I'm still taking only 800 IU a day of vitamin E and nothing yet is happening. How long did it take before it helped you. I don't have hyperacusis, but distortion (can't hear perfectly on the phone, it sounds fuzzy, music on the radio I can't hear well, etc.)
Tisha
-
I take Vitamin E already so I am curious about the same question Tisha had about the amount of time it took to notice a difference. I would have to increase the amt. of Vitamin E though since I take a low dose now. I am not sure which letters I am having trouble with so I will try to pay more to this. I remember hearing dog as dad once, and I knew the word didn't go with the rest of the sentence but couldn't figure it out. I had to ask several times before I got the word right. My husband talks in a soft voice, and I am forever hearing his words wrong.....mostly with "c's" as I am thinking about it now. I also notice that when talking on the phone I am now listening with my AN ear because the nonAN ear is way too loud to the point of making my ear hurt. I can't seem to find the happy medium....one ear is too loud and the other ear bothers me with word recognition. Confusing, but if that is all I have at this point I can live with it. Best wishes to all who are in the decision phase, adjustment phase and to those who help us find our way. Thanks. Nancy :)
-
Quick question to you all: How do you tell if you have hyperacussis?
Thank you,
Marianna
-
Tumbleweed,
Did the slight loss in hearing just happen recently with the hyperacussis? I'm still taking only 800 IU a day of vitamin E and nothing yet is happening. How long did it take before it helped you.
Tisha, my hearing loss began about 3 weeks ago, which was about 10 days prior to the onset of hyperacusis. The vitamin E helped me after a couple of days of taking it.
Marianna, I knew this is what I had because moderately loud midrange and high-frequency sounds became quite painful in my AN ear. It was not subtle.
Wikipedia excerpt: "Hyperacusis is a health condition characterized by an over-sensitivity to certain frequency ranges of sound (a collapsed tolerance to normal environmental sound). A person with severe hyperacusis has difficulty tolerating everyday sounds, some of which may seem unpleasantly loud to that person but not to others. The spelling as 'hyperacousis' is also common."
Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperacusis for more information.
Best wishes,
Tumbleweed
-
Marianna,
What Tumbleweed said! I would be sitting in the other room and someone would be getting ice outof the ice maker from the refrigerator. The clinks of the ice in the glass were unbelievalby high pitched and LOUD. Rustling paper has a 'lower' sound, but with hyperacusis, it's very high pitched and loud. You know it when you are experiencing it. FWIW, hyperacusis is the definition when you don't know why you have it. I think I would almost rather be deaf than have that my whole life.
Tisha