Misophonia: A Need for audiologic diagnostic guidelines.

The goal of this commentary is to present to audiologists the recent consensus definition of misophonia along with current clinical measures useful for audiologists in the diagnosis of misophonia. Up and coming behavioral methods that may be sensitive to misophonia are highlighted. Finally, a call is put out for translational audiologic research with the goal of developing diagnostic criteria for misophonia. The approach to the consensus definition is described, as well as the main characteristics of misophonia agreed upon by the expert panel. Next, available clinical measures that may be useful to audiologists for the diagnosis of misophonia are presented, followed by a brief review of current behavioral assessment methodology that still requires research to determine sensitivity and specificity to misophonia symptomatology. This discussion leads to the need for establishment of audiologic diagnostic criteria in misophonia, especially when differentiating from hyperacusis. While the consensus definition for misophonia is an excellent first step in obtaining expert agreement on the descriptors of misophonic triggers, reactions, and behavior, clinical research is critical in developing criteria for misophonia as a specific sound tolerance disorder.

Informations de copyright

The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Funding for this commentary was provided by The REAM Foundation and Milken Institute’s Center for Strategic Philanthropy in order to promote awareness of the new consensus definition for misophonia. J.C. serves as a member of the Misophonia Research Fund’s Scientific Advisory Board, who conceived of the definition project, but did not participate in the consensus definition committee nor had final approval/input into the definition language.