ABSTRACT
The insertion of grommets has been one of the most common procedures carried out by ENT surgeons for patients with persistent middle ear fluid. There has always been apprehension at the use of grommets by patients undertaking swimming or other water sports due to concerns of grommet penetration by water into the middle ear. Despite this, no common consensus exists amongst otolaryngologists regarding post-operative advice following grommet insertion. Most studies focus on surface swimming and do not consider other activities such as diving that patients may undertake. This study aimed to determine the hydrostatic head required for water to pass through a grommet using different water-based solutions. These were selected to simulate conditions such as swimming and showering or bathing. An improved model of a grommeted middle ear (based on previous work by Ricks et al.) was constructed using two 5-ml plastic syringes, latex (from a surgical glove), two rubber neoprene membranes and a Shah Ventilation Tube (1.14 mm). Different water solutions were added to the system and the hydrostatic head measured using digital calipers. The results revealed that the hydrostatic head required to penetrate a grommet is lowest using soapy water and highest with distilled water. The differences between chlorinated water and 3% saline were not significant. We hope that this study can be used in conjunction with previous work to better prepare the ENT surgeon in giving suitable post-operative advice following grommet insertion.
Subject(s)
Baths/adverse effects , Diving/adverse effects , Ear, Middle , Middle Ear Ventilation , Otitis Media with Effusion/surgery , Postoperative Complications , Ear, Middle/pathology , Ear, Middle/physiopathology , Ear, Middle/surgery , Humans , Middle Ear Ventilation/adverse effects , Middle Ear Ventilation/methods , Otitis Media with Effusion/diagnosis , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Research Design , Soaps , Water SportsABSTRACT
With increasing concerns of occupational exposure to bloodborne viruses in healthcare settings, NHS trusts are under pressure to consider opting for safer sharps devices that are designed to protect users from needlestick injuries. However, with an ever-increasing range of 'sharp safety' devices on the market, deciding what to purchase is a complex issue. In addition, evidence shows that purchasing safety devices alone will not eliminate the problem of needlestick injuries. This article discusses the criteria that should be taken into account when trusts consider introducing sharp safety devices into their workplace.
Subject(s)
Equipment and Supplies , Needlestick Injuries/prevention & control , Safety , Equipment Design , Humans , Infection Control , State MedicineABSTRACT
The moisturising properties of aloe vera have long been known. Examination gloves with aloe coatings are now available on the UK market for use in healthcare settings. This article examines the evidence surrounding the use of these gloves in the workplace to prevent dry, sore hands.
