Literature DB >> 11510392

A quasi-randomised controlled trial of water as a quick softening agent of persistent earwax in general practice.

J A Eekhof1, G H de Bock, S Le Cessie, M P Springer.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Earwax is a common problem in general practice. The incidence of complaints owing to earwax in general practice in the Netherlands is 39.3 per 1000 patients. AIM: To determine the feasibility of a strategy using water as a quick dispersant for persistent earwax, compared with the usual strategy using oil as a dispersant for three days in a general practice setting. DESIGN OF STUDY: Practice based, prospective controlled intervention study.
SETTING: Forty-two patients (59 ears) in four general practices in the Netherlands.
METHOD: Patients with persistent earwax were randomised into an intervention group and a control group. For patients in the intervention group, water drops at body temperature were dropped into the impacted ear and the auditory meatus was blocked with a wet wad of cotton. After the patient had waited for 15 minutes in the waiting room a series of attempts at syringing was completed. Patients in the control group received the usual strategy and were instructed to soften the earwax with oil each night before sleeping and to block the auditory meatus with a wad of cotton, for three days. They were asked to come back after three days for the second attempt of syringing. For both strategies the mean number of syringing attempts (and 95% confidence interval) was calculated and compared by testing the difference between the means using a t-test for independent samples. All ears in which the wax was still persistent after another five syringing attempts were given the value of 6 in the calculations.
RESULTS: The mean number of syringing attempts needed per patient in the intervention group was 3.0 (95% CI = 2.4 to 3.6) and for the control group, the mean was 2.4 (95% CI = 1.7 to 3.1). The difference between means (0.6, 95% CI = 0.3 to 1.5) was not statistically significant (P = 0.18).
CONCLUSION: A patient with persistent earwax can stay in the waiting room following the initial series of five attempts at syringing, with water instilled in the ear canal. After 15 minutes, the earwax is removed as easily as in the usual strategy using oil instilled for three days. The strategy using water as a dispersant for persistent earwax is quick and more convenient for the patient.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11510392      PMCID: PMC1314073     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  6 in total

1.  An in-vitro comparison of the disintegration of human ear wax by five cerumenolytics commonly used in general practice.

Authors:  A K Mehta
Journal:  Br J Clin Pract       Date:  1985-05

2.  An in vitro study to determine efficacy of different wax-dispersing agents.

Authors:  C Andaz; H B Whittet
Journal:  ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec       Date:  1993 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.538

3.  An evaluation of common cerumenolytic agents: an in-vitro study.

Authors:  M J Bellini; R M Terry; F A Lewis
Journal:  Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci       Date:  1989-02

4.  Use of solvents to disperse ear wax.

Authors:  E M Keane; H Wilson; D McGrane; D Coakley; J B Walsh
Journal:  Br J Clin Pract       Date:  1995 Mar-Apr

5.  Ear wax removal: a survey of current practice.

Authors:  J F Sharp; J A Wilson; L Ross; R M Barr-Hamilton
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990-12-01

6.  The efficacy of ceruminolytics: everything old is new again.

Authors:  A C Robinson; M Hawke
Journal:  J Otolaryngol       Date:  1989-10
  6 in total
  7 in total

Review 1.  Ear wax removal interventions: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Authors:  Emma Loveman; Elena Gospodarevskaya; Andy Clegg; Jackie Bryant; Petra Harris; Alex Bird; David A Scott; Peter Davidson; Paul Little; Richard Coppin
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 2.  [Complication rate of out-patient removal of ear wax: systematic review of the literature].

Authors:  G Schmiemann; C Kruschinski
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 1.284

3.  Effectiveness of ear syringing in general practice: a randomised controlled trial and patients' experiences.

Authors:  David Memel; Carole Langley; Chris Watkins; Barbara Laue; Martin Birchall; Max Bachmann
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 4.  The effectiveness of topical preparations for the treatment of earwax: a systematic review.

Authors:  Christopher Hand; Ian Harvey
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 5.  Cerumen Management: An Updated Clinical Review and Evidence-Based Approach for Primary Care Physicians.

Authors:  Garret A Horton; Matthew T W Simpson; Michael M Beyea; Jason A Beyea
Journal:  J Prim Care Community Health       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec

Review 6.  Ear drops for the removal of ear wax.

Authors:  Ksenia Aaron; Tess E Cooper; Laura Warner; Martin J Burton
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-07-25

Review 7.  WITHDRAWN: Ear drops for the removal of ear wax.

Authors:  Martin J Burton; Carolyn Doree
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-07-24
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.