Ventilation tube non-function due to blockage in children: the frequency, course and effect on hearing. A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect on hearing of non-functioning ventilation tubes due to blockage during the first six months post-operatively, using UK national guidelines. METHOD: A prospective, observational study was conducted on 37 children who underwent bilateral ventilation tube insertion. Air and bone conduction thresholds were measured before and following surgery, and at one, three and six months post-operatively. Tube non-function was assessed by tympanometry supported by otoscopy. RESULTS: Post-operatively, an average of 21 per cent of ventilation tubes were non-functioning. Ears with non-functioning tubes had significantly (p = 0.0001) poorer mean air conduction thresholds than functioning tubes, with a magnitude of 6 dB HL. Ears with otorrhoea were most affected (15 per cent). At any one visit, the air-bone gap was closed to 10 dB or less in 76 per cent of ears. Non-functioning tubes reduced this to 56 per cent. Compared with tympanometry, otoscopy underdiagnosed tube non-function due to blockage by 22 per cent. CONCLUSION: Non-functioning of ventilation tubes occurs frequently and can be missed on otoscopy. Although it is associated with poorer air conduction thresholds, the magnitude of this difference is unlikely to warrant further intervention unless there is otorrhoea or recurrence of bilateral hearing impairment.

The Glasgow Benefit Inventory: a systematic review of the use and value of an otorhinolaryngological generic patient-recorded outcome measure.

BACKGROUND: The Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) is a validated, generic patient-recorded outcome measure widely used in otolaryngology to report change in quality of life post-intervention. OBJECTIVES OF REVIEW: To date, no systematic review has made (i) a quality assessment of reporting of Glasgow Benefit Inventory outcomes; (ii) a comparison between Glasgow Benefit Inventory outcomes for different interventions and objectives; (iii) an evaluation of subscales in describing the area of benefit; (iv) commented on its value in clinical practice and research. TYPE OF REVIEW: Systematic review. SEARCH STRATEGY: 'Glasgow Benefit Inventory' and 'GBI' were used as keywords to search for published, unpublished and ongoing trials in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and Google in addition to an ISI citation search for the original validating Glasgow Benefit Inventory paper between 1996 and January 2015. EVALUATION METHOD: Papers were assessed for study type and quality graded by a predesigned scale, by two authors independently. Papers with sufficient quality Glasgow Benefit Inventory data were identified for statistical comparisons. Papers with <50% follow-up were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 118 eligible papers were identified for inclusion. A national audit paper (n = 4325) showed that the Glasgow Benefit Inventory gave a range of scores across the specialty, being greater for surgical intervention than medical intervention or 'reassurance'. Fourteen papers compared one form of surgery versus another form of surgery. In all but one study, there was no difference between the Glasgow Benefit Inventory scores (or of any other outcome). The most likely reason was lack of power. Two papers took an epidemiological approach and used the Glasgow Benefit Inventory scores to predict benefit. One was for tonsillectomy where duration of sore throat episodes and days with fever were identified on multivariate analysis to predict benefit albeit the precision was low. However, the traditional factor of number of episodes of sore throat was not predictive. The other was surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis where those with polyps on univariate analysis had greater benefit than those without. Forty-three papers had a response rate of >50% and gave sufficient Glasgow Benefit Inventory total and subscales for meta-analysis. For five of the 11 operation categories (vestibular schwannoma, tonsillectomy, cochlear implant, middle ear implant and stapes surgery) that were most likely to have a single clear clinical objective, score data had low-to-moderate heterogeneity. The value in the Glasgow Benefit Inventory having both positive and negative scores was shown by an overall negative score for the management of vestibular schwannoma. The other six operations gave considerable heterogeneity with rhinoplasty and septoplasty giving the greatest percentages (98% and 99%) most likely because of the considerable variations in patient selection. The data from these operations should not be used for comparative purposes. Five papers also reported the number of patients that had no or negative benefit, a potentially a more clinically useful outcome to report. Glasgow Benefit Inventory subscores for tonsillectomy were significantly different from ear surgery suggesting different areas of benefit CONCLUSIONS: The Glasgow Benefit Inventory has been shown to differentiate the benefit between surgical and medical otolaryngology interventions as well as 'reassurance'. Reporting benefit as percentages with negative, no and positive benefit would enable better comparisons between different interventions with varying objectives and pathology. This could also allow easier evaluation of factors that predict benefit. Meta-analysis data are now available for comparison purposes for vestibular schwannoma, tonsillectomy, cochlear implant, middle ear implant and stapes surgery. Fuller report of the Glasgow Benefit Inventory outcomes for non-surgical otolaryngology interventions is encouraged.

Positive pressure therapy for Meniere's syndrome/disease with a Meniett device: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Incidence rates of Meniere's syndrome/disease vary considerably from 157 per 100 000 in the United Kingdom to 15 per 100 000 in the United States. A wide range of treatments are used for the treatment of the condition with no consensus on the most effective intervention. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of the Meniett device in reducing the frequency and severity of vertigo in Meniere's syndrome/disease. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials were searched. The date of the last search was 13th May 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified that compared the efficacy of the Meniett device versus a placebo device in patients with Meniere's 'disease' as defined by the AAOO criterion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. The outcome data were dichotomous for all the included trials. MAIN RESULTS: The four RCTs compared 123 patients with the Meniett device against 114 patients with the placebo device from four RCT's over a follow-up period of 2 weeks to 4 months. There was a significant overall 61% reduction in the frequency of vertigo in both groups (mean no vertigo days per month of 8-3). However, this reduction was not significantly different between the two groups in any study or on meta-analysis [mean difference in vertigo-free days between Meniett and placebo device of 0.77 days over a 1-month period (95% CI - 0.82, 1.83) P = 0.45]. There were also no substantive data to support a greater reduction in the severity of the vertigo or any other outcome with the Meniett device compared with the placebo device. AUTHORS CONCLUSIONS: No evidence was found to justify the use of the Meniett device in Meniere's syndrome/disease.