I'm a hyprebaric oxygen chamber operator/technician at a small facility in Boston MA USA that was created 7 years ago by 2 families with children who needed HBOT.
We see a few client-patients with Tinnitus, but I, personally, have not seen enough folks come through our facility and continue with HBOT for the recommended number of 15-20 'sessions' to give any real evidence that HBOT helps. I have seen and heard others talk about the positive results, but I, personaly, have not seen enough people with Tinnitus come through our doors and stick with it.
The problem is two-fold: lack of advice from doctors knowledgeable about HBOT, and the perceived cost issue associated with HBOT.
The advice piece has the affect of discouraging client-patients from trying HBOT in the first place. And, this lack of advice is mainly due to a lack of medical trials, which is due to a lack of incentive by hospitals to further test the effect of HBOT on Tinnitus, all of which discouraging folks from trying HBOT, let alone sticking with it for the 15-20 recommended sessions.
The cost piece also discourages people from trying HBOT, and sticking with HBOT. But, the costs, like any product or service, vary according to the market. Right now, there are two sets of players - hospitals, and independents. If you go to a hospital and ask for a quote on cost, the hospital will give an inflated price based on what the hospital expects to be reimbursed through insurance. In the US, insurance can't be used for things like Tinnitus. So, the average person gets an incorrect answer from the hospital - a very inflated number. Independent facilities are the best source for this question. So, if you're hearing that costs are high, you need to compare apples to apples.
I can give my perspective, and offer our facility in Boston as a destination for anyone visiting the Boston area, and talk to the cost issue. In general, costs range around the US from $60/hour to $200/hour. Some more, some less. We're on the low side at my facility, because we're not associated with a hospital, and we do a lot with families to lower costs for folks, without jeopardizing safety.
To distill what HBOT is, I want to take a step back and simply state it. It's is simply putting a body in a chamber, pressurizing the chamber with air or oxygen, and then having the HBOT user breathe oxygen. That's it. Very simple. But, in any study you read (whether it's for Lyme, CP, rheumatoid arthritis, autism...), you'll always see a few standard things: safety/risks, depth, frequency (aka protocol), and the study's number of participants. The key to digesting these studies (along with anecdotal evidence and testimonials) is understanding where HBOT is in the field, and the rigor of the study.
Risks: In general, risks involve the risks associated with handling oxygen, and barotrauma (pressuring the ears, like you'd experience in an airplane). These risks would be brought up in any study. They have to be mentioned. Safety is the foremost concern of any facility, and if you don't feel safe, leave the facility.
Frequency of sessions vs. total hours: Studies will 'recommend,' or the reader will perceive that the recommendation is for 5 days/week or 7 days/week, etc. The thing to keep in mind when reading these is that the frequency is a byproduct of the study, not the design of the study. For example, when you see "5 days per week", that really means that the study brought together the participants (doctors, nurses, technicians, patients) over a period of time so that the study could be conducted and documented as efficiently as possible. They happened to meet 5 days a week, to get the study done and the staff back to their normal work. So, I would not necessarily interpret the frequency as a major component in the determination of protocol. In other words, the cumulative number of HBOT hours that a person gets under her belt is better (more important) than the frequency. In general, for the conditions I see, my experience is that the number of surprises (or improvements/changes) that occur over time is compacted if the total sessions is compacted, and those surprises are more spread out if the total number of sessions are spread out.
HBOT is simple, but that's the problem today in getting it understood by the medical community. No one company owns a patent on oxygen, so it's not promoted by any one company, and, thus, no one really has any incentive to talk about its benefits in the medical community, so it gets overlooked while patients are persuaded to take drugs.
HBOT is not well known by the general medical community, and it's not taught in medical school, because it's not tested. But, it is well known by the hyperbaric medical community and is being invested in by the hyperbaric medical community. Ten years ago, it was non-existent, and today you have hyperbaric chambers in ambulances.
For anyone who explores HBOT for any condition, I always try to remain neutral, because there's so much information available and it can be interpreted differently by differnt folks. Some are hell-bent against HBOT, because they think HBOT is too expensive etc., or they heard something negative about it on the cost or the experience front.
If you have questions like, "Should I invest in it?," "Is it dangerous?," "Will it cause ear trauma?," I can certainly help.
HBOT is safe, available outside of the hospital system to qualified client-patients, is relatively inexpensive, and is less risky than prescribed medications.